linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] freezer: add unsafe versions of freezable helpers

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: <20130506180517.070bc3e2@tlielax.poochiereds.net>
Date:	Mon, 6 May 2013 18:05:17 -0400
From:	Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Colin Cross <ccross@...roid.com>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@...omium.org>,
	Paul Walmsley <paul@...an.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	linux-nfs <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Ben Chan <benchan@...omium.org>,
	Steve French <smfrench@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] freezer: add unsafe versions of freezable helpers

On Mon, 6 May 2013 14:58:31 -0700
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

> On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Colin Cross <ccross@...roid.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> There are many other possibilities for other codepaths that end up in
> >> wait_for_response(). Once we get a solution in place for NFS, we'll
> >> need to do something very similar for CIFS.
> >
> > Makes sense, I will add CIFS to the patch.  Would you prefer it in the
> > same or separate patches.
> 
> Quite frankly, is it worth resurrecting these patches at all?
> 
> The only things it actually complained about are not worth the pain
> fixing and are getting explicitly not warned about - is there any
> reason to believe the patches are worth maintaining and the extra
> complexity is worth it?
> 
>            Linus

Well, these problems are worth the pain of fixing, I think. It's just
going to take us a while to get there since it involves some
significant surgery.

As to whether the warnings themselves are worthwhile now that we're
excluding the most egregious offenders from them, I don't much care
either way.

-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>
--
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/