linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH, RFC] Remove fasync() BKL usage, take 3325

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: <20090123045646.GK15750@one.firstfloor.org>
Date:	Fri, 23 Jan 2009 05:56:46 +0100
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	andi@...stfloor.org, viro@...IV.linux.org.uk, oleg@...hat.com,
	linux-api@...r.kernel.org, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] Remove fasync() BKL usage, take 3325

On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 03:32:49PM -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 06:51:04AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > OK, replacing a lock_kernel() with a spin_lock(&global_lock) is pretty
> > straightforwad.  But it's really really sad.  It basically leaves a great
> > big FIXME in there.  It'd be better to fix it.
> 
> 
> Umm, we've been discussiong this in and out a guestimated million times.
> 
> Let's go forward with Jon's patch which is on obvious improvement and
> if it shows problems later on we can revisit it.

The point was that we already have a better patch from Oleg.

-Andi
-- 
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
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/