linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] usb: f_mass_storage: test whether thread is running before starting another

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <xa1tshyxgyng.fsf@mina86.com>
Date:	Thu, 07 Apr 2016 18:40:51 +0200
From:	Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@...a86.com>
To:	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc:	Ivaylo Dimitrov <ivo.g.dimitrov.75@...il.com>,
	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
	Felipe Balbi <felipe.balbi@...ux.intel.com>,
	Bin Liu <b-liu@...com>, pali.rohar@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: f_mass_storage: test whether thread is running before starting another

> On Thu, 7 Apr 2016, Michal Nazarewicz wrote:
>> This makes me suspect it’s not possible to link a function instance to
>> the same configuration twice, but now that I think about it, I’m not
>> quite sure what would happen if one did:
>> 
>> 	ln -s functions/mass_storage.0 configs/c.1/foo
>> 	ln -s functions/mass_storage.0 configs/c.1/bar

On Thu, Apr 07 2016, Alan Stern wrote:
> Do you think it would be worthwhile to check for this possibility in 
> the driver and report an error?

I think this should be (if it isn’t already) blocked on configfs side.
I cannot see a legitimate use of such configuration and I wouldn’t be
surprised if other function drivers broke as well.

-- 
Best regards
ミハウ “𝓶𝓲𝓷𝓪86” ナザレヴイツ
«If at first you don’t succeed, give up skydiving»