| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <d1af83620805230436w28274e82tc98261b69ecd1330@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 08:36:10 -0300 From: "Kevin Winchester" <kjwinchester@...il.com> To: "Alan Cox" <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> Cc: mingo@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Switch apm to unlocked_kernel On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 5:22 PM, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote: > This pushes the lock a fair way down and the final kill looks like it > should be an easy project for someone who wants to have a shot at it. > I would like to have a shot at this if no one else if currently working on it. This would be my first attempt to graduate from testing (and a few simple patches) to an actual functional change. I would expect that the steps involved are: - See what data is affected under the BKL - See where else that data may be affected (including possible parallel calls to the same path) - Decide what locking is necessary - Implement it (the easy part) If this is about right (and I'm not missing anything major) - I will give it a try and see where I get. If, however, I have just proved that I do not have a full grasp of the problem, or if someone else is already working on this particular path - please let me know. -- Kevin Winchester -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists