linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/13] Re: Scalability requirements for sysv ipc

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]

Date:	Mon, 14 Apr 2008 20:54:23 +0200
From:	Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>
To:	Nadia Derbey <Nadia.Derbey@...l.net>
CC:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, efault@....de,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, xemul@...nvz.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] Re: Scalability requirements for sysv ipc

Nadia Derbey wrote:
>
> Well, 1 interface changes, 1 is added and another one went away:
>
> 1) for the preload part (it becomes like the radix-tree preload part):
>
> int idr_pre_get(struct idr *, gfp_t);
> would become
> int idr_pre_get(gfp_t);
>
Btw, that's one point I didn't understand about the idr code:
Is it interrupt-safe? It uses spin_lock_irqsave and gfp_t, this implies 
that it could be called from all contexts.

But the prealloc made me a bit nervous: does it handle idr_pre_get(); 
interrupt with another idr_pre_get(), add, pre_get_end, interrupt ends, 
... correctly?

If it's only intended to be called from process context I would remove 
the _irqsave and perhaps add an assert(!in_interrupt())
--
    Manfred
--
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/