linux-kernel - Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/4] dma-buf: don't hold the mutex around map/unmap calls

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAO_48GF_x+B0pZeFZ+URU6arX9Fw3=VAvFFrkyHpm6Lp-3n6Tg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 22 Mar 2012 11:33:01 +0530
From:	Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>
To:	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>
Cc:	linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	DRI Development <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
	linux-media@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/4] dma-buf: don't hold the mutex around
 map/unmap calls

On 19 March 2012 05:04, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch> wrote:
> The mutex protects the attachment list and hence needs to be held
> around the callbakc to the exporters (optional) attach/detach
> functions.
>
> Holding the mutex around the map/unmap calls doesn't protect any
> dma_buf state. Exporters need to properly protect any of their own
> state anyway (to protect against calls from their own interfaces).
> So this only makes the locking messier (and lockdep easier to anger).
>
> Therefore let's just drop this.
>
> v2: Rebased on top of latest dma-buf-next git.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>
> Reviewed-by: Rob Clark <rob.clark@...aro.org>
Thanks; Applied to for-next.
> ---
<snip>
BR,
~Sumit.
--
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/