linux-kernel - Re: Is devm

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: <3561824.rKlMSGlkdL@avalon>
Date:	Tue, 28 Jul 2015 20:05:49 +0300
From:	Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...il.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Is devm_* broken ?

On Tuesday 28 July 2015 11:22:25 Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 05:16:16PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > Using devm_kzalloc() in such a way has value though, and reverting drivers
> > to the pre-devm memory allocation code would make error handling and
> > cleanup code paths more complex again. Should we introduce a managed
> > allocator for that purpose that would have a lifespan explicitly handled
> > by drivers ?
>
> I don't know.  Sure, we can have memory allocations which are tied to
> open file; however, the distinction between that and regular devm
> resources, which can't linger on no matter what, would be subtle and
> confusing.  IMHO, a better approach would be implmenting generic
> revoke feature and sever open files on driver detach so that
> everything can be shutdown then.

Sounds like a topic for the kernel summit :-) I'll send a proposal.

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart

--
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/