| 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: <1217490173.3454.47.camel@pmac.infradead.org> Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 08:42:53 +0100 From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org> To: David Dillow <dave@...dillows.org> Cc: Jaswinder Singh <jaswinder@...radead.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, becker@...ld.com, davidpmclean@...oo.com, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] typhoon: use request_firmware On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 23:37 -0400, David Dillow wrote: > request_firmware()'s mutex is protecting against things inside of that > subsystem, but offers no protection between the test on typhoon_fw != > NULL and the setting of it inside of the firmware loader. That > requires locking at a higher level. > > Anyways, probing is single threaded and I seem to recall it being > unlikely to be made parallel due to the number issues exposed last > time, so a minimal comment is fine. An alternative approach is to make request_firmware() do the duplicate avoidance for itself. Since we made fw->data const (as 'fw' itself always was), no users should be changing anything in the requested firmware. It can be safely reused by generic code. That simplifies the logic in drivers -- they just request what they want, as many times as they want it, and don't have to care about the potential duplication. -- dwmw2 -- 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