linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] IB/uverbs: BKL is not needed for ib_uverbs

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: <20080630165543.1ccd8858@bike.lwn.net>
Date:	Mon, 30 Jun 2008 16:55:43 -0600
From:	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To:	Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, general@...ts.openfabrics.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] IB/uverbs: BKL is not needed for ib_uverbs_open()

On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 14:43:20 -0700
Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com> wrote:

> Is this sort of patch the next step in the BKL-removal plan?  Is now
> an appropriate time to send such things?
> 
> If this looks good to you I will do a careful audit of the rest of
> drivers/infiniband/core and send you a few more similar patches.

That's the general idea: audit the code where the BKL appears and
remove it when it's safe to do so.  It's always an appropriate time;
the only question is whether you think this change is good to go into
the tree for 2.6.27, or whether it should hang out in linux-next for
one more cycle.  I would assume that the extra time would not be
necessary.

Thanks,

jon
--
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/