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: <20081210004810.GA5073@infernal.debian.net>
Date:	Wed, 10 Dec 2008 01:48:10 +0100
From:	Andreas Bombe <aeb@...ian.org>
To:	Joerg Dorchain <joerg@...chain.net>
Cc:	linux-m68k@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] amiflop: get rid of sleep_on calls

On Tue, Dec 09, 2008 at 09:26:08AM +0100, Joerg Dorchain wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 08, 2008 at 04:59:38PM +0000, Andreas Bombe wrote:
> > The replacement for the unconditional sleep_on() in fd_motor_on() is a
> > complete_all() together with a INIT_COMPLETION() before the mod_timer()
> > call.  It appears to me that fd_motor_on() might be called concurrently
> > and fd_select() does not guarantee mutual exclusivity in the case the
> > same drive gets selected again.
> 
> Selecting the same drive repeatly does not matter. The selected
> drive is the one the next command or transfer applies to.

I think we're not talking about the same problem.  If I were to use
complete() together with wait_for_completion() there would be a problem
if fd_motor_on() can get as far as wait_for_completion() while a
previous completion is yet uncompleted.  This can not happen for
different drives, as the fd_select() would block.  If it could happen
for the same drive, the complete() would allow only one task to
continue.  The complete_all() takes care of that.

If requests are serialized for a drive so that there won't ever be two
running at the same time for certain (thinking about it, it's probable),
I could make it a simple complete().  It's hardly worth the risk,
however.
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ