linux-kernel - Re: [ewg] [PATCH] IB/ehca: Protect QP against destroying until all async events for it are handled.

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: <200805071800.15595.ossrosch@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Wed, 7 May 2008 18:00:14 +0200
From:	Stefan Roscher <ossrosch@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"LinuxPPC-Dev" <linuxppc-dev@...abs.org>,
	"OF-EWG" <ewg@...ts.openfabrics.org>, fenkes@...ibm.com,
	raisch@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [ewg] [PATCH] IB/ehca: Protect QP against destroying until all async events for it are handled.

On Wednesday 07 May 2008 17:32:03 Roland Dreier wrote:
>  > We are not sure if this should be fixed in the driver or in uverbs itself.
>  > Roland, what's your opinion about this?
> 
> Would be nice to be able to fix it in uverbs but I don't see how.  In
> particular a kernel consumer has to have the same guarantee that no
> async events will come in after destroy QP returns.  And I don't see any
> way generic code can provide a guarantee about what low-level driver
> code may do internally.
> 

I agree, that's why I posted the driver fix first.
So, will you apply it next?

Regards Stefan

--
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/