linux-kernel - Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/6] xen-blkfront: handle backend CLOSED without CLOSING

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]

Message-Id: <506D7D9A020000780009F9C8@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
Date:	Thu, 04 Oct 2012 11:14:18 +0100
From:	"Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@...e.com>
To:	"David Vrabel" <david.vrabel@...rix.com>
Cc:	"xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com" <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
	"Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk" <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/6] xen-blkfront: handle backend
 CLOSED without CLOSING

>>> On 25.09.12 at 19:53, David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com> wrote:
> @@ -1167,7 +1168,8 @@ blkfront_closing(struct blkfront_info *info)
>  
>  	mutex_lock(&bdev->bd_mutex);
>  
> -	if (bdev->bd_openers) {
> +	/* If the backend is already CLOSED, close now. */
> +	if (bdev->bd_openers && backend_state != XenbusStateClosed) {
>  		xenbus_dev_error(xbdev, -EBUSY,
>  				 "Device in use; refusing to close");
>  		xenbus_switch_state(xbdev, XenbusStateClosing);

This looks wrong to me on a second glance: As long as there
are users of the device, I don't think we want to go into Closed
ourselves, irrespective of the backend state.

Jan

--
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/