linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH V5 1/5] PCI: Embed pci_ecam_ops in pci_config

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]

Date:   Sun, 4 Sep 2016 21:22:03 -0500
From:   Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
To:     Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>
Cc:     Tomasz Nowicki <tn@...ihalf.com>, arnd@...db.de,
        will.deacon@....com, catalin.marinas@....com, rafael@...nel.org,
        hanjun.guo@...aro.org, okaya@...eaurora.org, jchandra@...adcom.com,
        cov@...eaurora.org, dhdang@....com, ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org,
        robert.richter@...iumnetworks.com, mw@...ihalf.com,
        Liviu.Dudau@....com, ddaney@...iumnetworks.com,
        wangyijing@...wei.com, msalter@...hat.com,
        linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org, jcm@...hat.com,
        andrea.gallo@...aro.org, jeremy.linton@....com,
        liudongdong3@...wei.com, gabriele.paoloni@...wei.com,
        jhugo@...eaurora.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH V5 1/5] PCI: Embed pci_ecam_ops in pci_config_window
 structure

On Fri, Sep 02, 2016 at 04:38:45PM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 01, 2016 at 01:23:45PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 03:05:37PM +0200, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
> > > pci_config_window keeps pointer to pci_ecam_ops and every time
> > > we want to deallocate pci_config_window (pci_ecam_free()) we need to make
> > > sure to free pci_ecam_ops in case it was dynamically allocated prior to
> > > pci_ecam_create() call.
> > 
> > I think this is a theoretical problem, right?  All the current callers
> > pass a pointer to a static pci_ecam_ops struct that does not need to
> > be deallocated.
> > 
> > I see that the next patch uses a pci_ecam_ops struct on the stack,
> 
> I asked Tomasz why we need to have pci_ecam_ops on the stack in the
> first place since I do not think it is needed, or nicer (actually I
> think it is not nice at all, what's the problem in making it static ?).

If it's useful to copy the struct instead of saving the pointer, that's
fine.  I just want the changelog to match the diff.

Bjorn