linux-kernel - Re: devtmpfs [censored] oddities

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20091217010041.GA6479@suse.de>
Date:	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 17:00:41 -0800
From:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
To:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>
Subject: Re: devtmpfs [censored] oddities

On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 12:46:43AM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 04:39:22PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 08:04:31AM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> > > 	May I respectfully suggest that a blocking operation (such as
> > > kstrdup with GFP_KERNEL, or grabbing a mutex, or, say it, pathname resolution)
> > > is not quite the thing to do while holding an rwlock?
> > > 
> > > 	As it is, any device_add() is an embarrassingly obvious deadlock
> > > waiting to happen...
> > 
> > Thomas has posted a patch to fix this now.
> > 
> > Sorry for not catching it sooner, we should just delete the rwlocks so
> > no one tries to ever use it again.
> 
> Say again?  Why would we delete rwlocks?

Sorry, no _new_ use of rwlocks should be added, generally they are used
incorrectly, like this one was.

thanks,

greg k-h
--
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/