linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 4/8] DMA: Freescale: add fsl_dma_free

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5350A57A.1060509@freescale.com>
Date:	Fri, 18 Apr 2014 12:09:30 +0800
From:	Hongbo Zhang <hongbo.zhang@...escale.com>
To:	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
CC:	<vkoul@...radead.org>, <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
	<dmaengine@...r.kernel.org>, <scottwood@...escale.com>,
	<leo.li@...escale.com>, <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/8] DMA: Freescale: add fsl_dma_free_descriptor()
 to reduce code duplication


On 04/14/2014 09:40 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 16:14 +0800, Hongbo Zhang wrote:
>> On 04/10/2014 07:29 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2014-04-10 at 15:10 +0800, hongbo.zhang@...escale.com wrote:
> []
>
>>>> @@ -819,8 +826,7 @@ static void fsldma_cleanup_descriptor(struct fsldma_chan *chan,
>>>>    	dma_run_dependencies(txd);
>>>>    
>>>>    	dma_descriptor_unmap(txd);
>>>> -	chan_dbg(chan, "LD %p free\n", desc);
>>>> -	dma_pool_free(chan->desc_pool, desc, txd->phys);
>>>> +	fsl_dma_free_descriptor(chan, desc);
>>> Here is no list_del() call since it's been called in dma_do_tasklet().
>>> What will be the result of double list_del() against the same node?
>> Not clear with your point.
>> This patch is only introducing a common fsl_dma_free_descriptor() to
>> reduce code duplication. And later in the patch 6/8 the
>> fsldma_cleanup_descriptor() is replaced by fsldma_cleanup_descriptorS().
> In the last case you could have a broken kernel which will fails on
> double list_del(). I think it's better to leave this one untouched and
> you may remove it later.
>
> Or move this patch after you have removed that lines.
>

Good catch, thank you Andy.
Yes I prefer to leave this untouched and handle it later.




--
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/