linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] Driver for Freescale 8610 and 5121 DIU

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4803690A.3080105@gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 14 Apr 2008 16:24:10 +0200
From:	Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>
To:	Timur Tabi <timur@...escale.com>
CC:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	York Sun <yorksun@...escale.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linuxppc-dev@...abs.org, galak@...nel.crashing.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Driver for Freescale 8610 and 5121 DIU

On 04/14/2008 04:12 PM, Timur Tabi wrote:
> Unfortunately, the author of the patch, York, is out this week, so I'll have to
> take care of this.  It'd be easier to modify rh_alloc() so that it doesn't
> sleep, so that's what I'm going to do.

Anyway, why do you need the spin lock there (and not mutex)? As I think you are 
still trying to avoid the problem instead of fixing it. Removing GFP_WAIT 
(fsl_diu_alloc) doesn't seem to me as mm friendly solution, especially if you 
allocate that much memory and you can sleep. But I might be wrong, you may need 
the spinlock...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/