linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] net: wireless: airo semaphore to mutex

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:	Tue, 27 May 2008 07:13:25 -0600
From:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
To:	Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>
Cc:	linville@...driver.com, rusty@...tcorp.com.au, mingo@...e.hu,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
	arjan@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: wireless: airo semaphore to mutex

On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 04:21:03PM -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>

Reviewing the driver, this really doesn't feel like a classical lock.
It feels very much ad-hoc, with most references to ->sem being
unbalanced.

The driver has a thread (airo_thread) and it seems to be trying to
synchronise against both the interrupt handler, and other threads
(calling eg ->get_stats).

I think it really wants to be using spin_lock_irqsave() instead of a
mutex.  I'd want to study the driver in a lot more detail before making
that kind of change though.

-- 
Intel are signing my paycheques ... these opinions are still mine
"Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this
operating system, but compare it to ours.  We can't possibly take such
a retrograde step."
--
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/