linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] m2p_find_override: use list_for_each_entry

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, 27 Mar 2012 17:37:07 +0100
From:	Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>
To:	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
CC:	Stefano Stabellini <Stefano.Stabellini@...citrix.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com" <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] m2p_find_override: use list_for_each_entry_safe

On Tue, 27 Mar 2012, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 02:52:44PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > Use list_for_each_entry_safe and remove the spin_lock acquisition in
> > m2p_find_override.
> 
> So this would allow us to get stale entries. Is that OK?

I think it is reasonable.
In practice we should never get an m2p_find_override call looking for an
entry that we are about to add/delete.
--
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/