linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] block: fix block

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 14 Jul 2008 20:50:57 +0900
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>
CC:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>, Greg K-H <greg@...ah.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: fix block_class iteration locking

Cornelia Huck wrote:
> Greg has some patches sitting in his tree that convert those functions
> to use class_{for_each,find}_device() instead - and that looks like the
> clean solution, especially since the class implementation details will
> be moved into a private structure. One worry though...

Yeah, that sounds nice.

> With your patch, you protect against adding/removing devices to/from
> the class between _start and _stop. This wasn't done previously, and
> won't be done with Greg's patches (which leaves in the
> locking/unlocking of block_class_lock). Not sure if I'm missing
> something here...

That's mostly the point of this patch.  It wasn't protected properly
before.  It would be best if there's a safe iterator (maybe use klist?).

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/