linux-kernel - Re: Does vm_operations_struct require a .owner field?

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: <20160105235418.GA1599@imap.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 6 Jan 2016 00:54:21 +0100
From:	"Steinar H. Gunderson" <sesse@...gle.com>
To:	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc:	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
	"linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Does vm_operations_struct require a .owner field?

On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 04:31:09PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> Thank you.  So it looks like I was worried about nothing.
> 
> Steinar, you can remove the try_module_get/module_put lines from your
> patch.  Also, the list_del() and comment in usbdev_release() aren't 
> needed -- at that point we know the memory_list has to be empty since 
> there can't be any outstanding URBs or VMA references.  If you take 
> those things out then the patch should be ready for merging.

Good, thanks. Did so, compiled, testing it still works, sending :-)

/* Steinar */
-- 
Software Engineer, Google Switzerland
--
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/