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:	Tue, 10 May 2011 13:00:26 +0000
From:	KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
CC:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, "gregkh@...e.de" <gregkh@...e.de>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"devel@...uxdriverproject.org" <devel@...uxdriverproject.org>,
	"virtualization@...ts.osdl.org" <virtualization@...ts.osdl.org>
Subject: RE: various vmbus review comments



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christoph Hellwig [mailto:hch@...radead.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2011 1:24 AM
> To: KY Srinivasan
> Cc: Christoph Hellwig; Greg KH; gregkh@...e.de; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org;
> devel@...uxdriverproject.org; virtualization@...ts.osdl.org
> Subject: Re: various vmbus review comments
> 
> On Mon, May 09, 2011 at 02:56:52PM +0000, KY Srinivasan wrote:
> > I will address this. Greg had a concern about module reference counting
> > and looking at the current code, it did not appear to be an issue. The
> > change you are suggesting will not affect the vmbus core which is what I want
> > to focus on. I will however, fix this issue in the current round of patches I will
> > send out this week.
> 
> It very clearly affects the interface between the core and the
> functional drivers.  Trying to submit the core without making sure the
> interface is exports works properly is not an overly good idea.

I must be missing something here. As I look at the block driver (and
this is indicative of other drivers as well); the exit routine -
blkvsc_drv_exit, first iterates through all the devices it manages
and invokes device_unregister() on each of the devices and then 
invokes vmbus_child_driver_unregister() which is just a wrapper on
driver_unregister(). So, if I understand you correctly, you want the devices to
persist even if there is no driver bound to them. So, if I eliminated the code
that iterates over the devices and unregisters them, that should fix the problem
and I can do this without changing the vmbus core interfaces.

Regards,

K. Y


--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ