linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] um: net: replace GFP_KERNEL with GFP

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]

Date:	Thu, 29 Oct 2015 16:00:48 +0100
From:	Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
	Saurabh Sengar <saurabh.truth@...il.com>
Cc:	jdike@...toit.com, user-mode-linux-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	user-mode-linux-user@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] um: net: replace GFP_KERNEL with GFP_ATOMIC when
 spinlock is held

Am 29.10.2015 um 15:50 schrieb Joe Perches:
> On Thu, 2015-10-29 at 14:46 +0530, Saurabh Sengar wrote:
>> replace GFP_KERNEL with GFP_ATOMIC while spinlock is held,
>> as code while holding a spinlock should be atomic.
>> GFP_KERNEL may sleep and can cause deadlock,
>> where as GFP_ATOMIC may fail but certainly avoids deadlock
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Saurabh Sengar <saurabh.truth@...il.com>
>> ---
>> v3: removed the atomic variable, as per Richard comment
> 
> Trivia: You could remove the gfp_mask variables too
> 	and just use GFP_KERNEL and GFP_ATOMIC directly.

Yep.
And "int gfp_mask" does also not make sense, GFP_* is of type
gfp_t.

Thanks,
//richard
--
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/