linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] QE: Use GFP_ATOMIC while spin_lock

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: <1453769574.27129.14.camel@buserror.net>
Date:	Mon, 25 Jan 2016 18:52:54 -0600
From:	Scott Wood <oss@...error.net>
To:	Saurabh Sengar <saurabh.truth@...il.com>, qiang.zhao@...escale.com,
	christophe.leroy@....fr, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] QE: Use GFP_ATOMIC while spin_lock_irqsave is held

On Sun, 2016-01-24 at 12:24 +0530, Saurabh Sengar wrote:
> cpm_muram_alloc_common is called twice and both the times
> spin_lock_irqsave is held.
> Using GFP_KERNEL can sleep in spin_lock_irqsave context and cause
> deadlock
> 
> Signed-off-by: Saurabh Sengar <saurabh.truth@...il.com>
> ---
> Let me know if there is any other way to fix it.
> Also, I would say this function should be static as it is not used in any
> other file
>  drivers/soc/fsl/qe/qe_common.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Yes, it should be static.  Do you plan to send a patch for that?

-Scott