linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH tty-next] n_tty: Fix termios

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: <5208E575.1080008@hurleysoftware.com>
Date:	Mon, 12 Aug 2013 09:39:01 -0400
From:	Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>
To:	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC:	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
	Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH tty-next] n_tty: Fix termios_rwsem lockdep false positive

On 08/12/2013 09:19 AM, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (08/12/13 08:55), Peter Hurley wrote:
>>>>> [..]
>>>>>   drivers/tty/n_tty.c | 25 +++++++++++--------------
>>>>>   1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>
>>> I hate to do this, but isn't it actually my patch posted here
>>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/8/1/510
>>>
>>> which was tagged as `wrong'?
>>
>> Sergey,
>>
>> My apologies; I was mistaken regarding this problem being a lockdep
>> regression (although it's still a false positive from lockdep). Once
>> I had worked around some issues with the nouveau driver, I was able to
>> reproduce the lockdep report on 3.10.
>>
> no problem.
>
>> I included Artem's lockdep report in the changelog because I received
>> that first, on 30 July.
>>
>> My patch below is not the same as your patch of 1 Aug. This patch
>> preserves the protected access of termios.c_cc[VMIN] and termios.c_cc[VTIME]
>> (via the MIN_CHAR() and TIME_CHAR() macros).
>
> fair enough. v3 was protecting VMIN/VTIME (my bad, I noticed this a bit later),
> but I didn't submit it since v2 did not get positive response.
>
>> If you'd prefer, I could add to changelog:
>>
>>     Patch based on original posted here https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/8/1/510
>>     by Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
>
> if you don't mind, that would be great.

Ok.

Greg,
Should I re-spin a v2 to include the note above
(or can you add it with Artem's Tested-by)?

Regards,
Peter Hurley
--
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/