linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/8] staging: vme: add functions for bridge module refcounting

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:	Fri, 5 Aug 2011 11:04:16 +0200
From:	Manohar Vanga <manohar.vanga@...n.ch>
To:	Martyn Welch <martyn.welch@...com>
CC:	"Emilio G. Cota" <cota@...ap.org>, <gregkh@...e.de>,
	<devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] staging: vme: add functions for bridge module
 refcounting

Hey Martin,

> Actually, it would give you a good indication of how many of the resources
> provided by each VME bridge chip were used. I don't see the refcount
> accurately reflecting the number of users as being important, more as a means
> of tracking which bridges have resources that are being used (and therefore
> can't be removed).

On second thought, I think I agree with Emilio that the _module_ refcount should
reflect the number of users (other modules) using the bridge module. The refcount
of resources should probably stay separate from the refcount of module usage. We
can add resource refcounting as well but I don't see a need for it at the moment.

vme_bridge_get() and vme_bridge_put() in this case should refer to the reference
count of the bridge module (not the resources). What do you think?

Thanks!

--
/manohar
--
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/