linux-kernel - Re: [2.6.33-rc5] tty: possible irq lock inversion dependency in tty

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]

Date:	Sat, 6 Feb 2010 23:27:02 -0800
From:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
	taviso@...gle.com, viro@...IV.linux.org.uk,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
	alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, jdike@...toit.com, jln@...gle.com,
	mpm@...enic.com
Subject: Re: [2.6.33-rc5] tty: possible irq lock inversion dependency in
	tty_fasync

On Sat, Feb 06, 2010 at 10:46:01PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> 
> On Sat, 6 Feb 2010, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > 
> > Yeah. I think we need to just revert that commit.
> > 
> > Or maybe we could just do the following, rather than revert it outright: 
> > just get a ref to the 'struct pid' while holding the spinlock, and then 
> > releasing it after doing the __f_setown() call.
> 
> Btw, if we do this, then we should probably revert commit 
> b04da8bfdfbbd79544cab2fadfdc12e87eb01600 at the same time.
> 
> Resulting patch would then look like the appended.

The patch looks correct to me, thanks for fixing this.

  Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>

Can you commit it to your tree, or do you need/want me to submit it?

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/