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
| ||
|
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists