linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] snapshot: Push BKL down into ioctl handlers

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: <200805231322.33321.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date:	Fri, 23 May 2008 13:22:32 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...l.org,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] snapshot: Push BKL down into ioctl handlers

On Friday, 23 of May 2008, Alan Cox wrote:
> > >  
> > > +	lock_kernel();
> > > +
> > 
> > Hm, well, I admit I'm a bit ignorant as far as the chardev locking is
> > concerned, but can you please tell me why would that be wrong if we didn't call
> > lock_kernel() here at all?
> 
> I've just been pushing the lock down. If the code already has enough
> internal locking for things like multiple ioctls in parallel then you can
> probably kill it entirely - but that needs someone who knows that driver
> well to decide and evaluate.

Thanks, I'll have a look.

ACK for the patch from me.

Thanks,
Rafael
--
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/