linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/5] usb_serial: Kill port mutex

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: <200910071810.02966.oliver@neukum.org>
Date:	Wed, 7 Oct 2009 18:10:02 +0200
From:	Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org>
To:	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc:	Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>, greg@...ah.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] usb_serial: Kill port mutex

Am Mittwoch, 7. Oktober 2009 18:03:08 schrieb Alan Stern:
> On Wed, 7 Oct 2009, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > We will need some generic way to autoresume from open.
> > Resume will need to lock against open() and need to be called
> > from within open(). Any ideas for an unugly interface?
>
> It's not quite that bad.  Resume doesn't need to lock against open.
> If open is called while resume is running then when it tries to do its
> own resume, it will either block (waiting for the pm_mutex) or return
> immediately (if it sees the device is already resumed).

But resume() needs to know whether the read URBs need to be
submitted or not.

	Regards
		Oliver

--
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/