linux-kernel - Re: PROBLEM: in_atomic() misuse all over the place

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: <20090131.004843.127193545.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Sat, 31 Jan 2009 00:48:43 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc:	andi@...stfloor.org, roger.larsson@...atan.se,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, rml@...h9.net,
	pavel@....cz, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: PROBLEM: in_atomic() misuse all over the place

From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 21:49:33 -0800

> Hang on.  You said
> 
>   That's typically for softirq vs non softirq, which is important for
>   the network stack.
> 
> that's what in_softirq() does.
> 
> Now, if networking is indeed using in_atomic() to detect
> are-we-inside-a-spinlock then networking is buggy.
> 
> If networking is _not_ doing that then we can safely switch it to
> in_sortirq() or in_interrupt().  And this would reenable the bug
> detection which networking's use of in_atomic() accidentally
> suppressed.

I think this is a reasonable conclusion, looking at the
gfp_any() users.

Feel free to change it to use in_softirq() and see what
explodes in -mm.  Report to me your findings :-)
--
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/