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: <20090128071351.3643800e@bike.lwn.net>
Date:	Wed, 28 Jan 2009 07:13:51 -0700
From:	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, hch@...radead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, viro@...IV.linux.org.uk,
	linux-api@...r.kernel.org, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] Remove fasync() BKL usage, take 3325

On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 05:23:37 +0100
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:

> But please don't forget it is not strictly necessary f_op->fasync()
> must use fasync_helper(). And we have users (pipe_rdwr_fasync) which
> call fasync_helper() twice.

Understood.  Any such change will certainly require an audit of all
in-tree fasync() implementations; that's part of why it's taking a
little while.  But it also cleans things up and solves the atomicity
problems nicely, so I think it's worth trying.

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/