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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Mon, 6 Oct 2014 17:01:18 -0400
From:	Tejun Heo <>
To:	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <>
Cc:	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <>,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
	Tetsuo Handa <>,
	Joseph Salisbury <>,
	Kay Sievers <>,
	One Thousand Gnomes <>,
	Tim Gardner <>,
	Pierre Fersing <>,
	Andrew Morton <>,
	Nagalakshmi Nandigama <>,
	Praveen Krishnamoorthy <>,
	Sreekanth Reddy <>,
	Abhijit Mahajan <>,
	Casey Leedom <>,
	Hariprasad S <>,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 7/7] driver-core: add preferred async probe option for
 built-in and modules


On Mon, Oct 06, 2014 at 10:36:27PM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > Do we intend to keep this param permanently?  Isn't this more of a
> > temp tool to be used during development?  If so, maybe we should make
> > that clear with __DEVEL__ too?
> As its designed right now no, its not a temp tool, its there to
> require compatibility with old userspace. For modules we can require
> the module parameter but for built-in we need something else and this
> is what came to mind. It is also what would allow the prefer_async_probe
> flag too as otherwise we won't know if userspace is prepared.

I don't get it.  For in-kernel stuff, we already have a clear
synchronization point where we already synchronize all async calls.
Shouldn't we be flushing these async probes there too?  insmod'ing is
userland visible but there's no reason this has to be for the built-in


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists