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: <AANLkTimO6CN9wOQco_1bqRmwBS7KfWW1CvumKFuiOWGH@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 17 Nov 2010 14:23:23 -0800
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
Cc:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: BKL: remove extraneous #include <smp_lock.h>

On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com> wrote:
>
> smp_lock.h was removed from hardirq.h.  smp_lock.h provided the function prototype
> for kernel_locked().  Should source files now #include <linux/smp_lock.h> ?
> even when not being built for SMP?

Hmm. I think that part was a mistake, but I suspect the simplest fix
for it is to simply get rid of "kernel_locked()". It has no other
users than the hardirq.h one, so let's just move it there.

Something like the attached?

NOTE! The reason I _only_ take the CONFIG_LOCK_KERNEL version from
smp_lock.h is because:

 - LOCK_KERNEL is defined by init/Kconfig as "(SMP || PREEMPT) && BKL"

 - inside hardirq.h we only use "kernel_locked()" inside "PREEMPT && BKL"

 - so "PREEMPT && BKL" implies "LOCK_KERNEL"

 - so the !LOCK_KERNEL kernel_locked() case is irrelevant.

unless I did a thinko somewhere.

Does this work in all configurations? TOTALLY UNTESTED! Caveat emptor.

                 Linus

View attachment "patch.diff" of type "text/x-patch" (1209 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ