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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 20:40:37 +0200 From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org> To: Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@...-carit.de> Cc: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>, Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>, Daniel Wagner <wagi@...om.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, "rafael.j.wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...el.com>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>, Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>, Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/5] firmware: document user mode helper lock usage On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 08:16:29AM +0200, Daniel Wagner wrote: > > > Sorry, I am a bit confused now. What is the consensus here: > > > > > > a) add a comment to _request_firmware() as in this patch #1 v5 > > > > The adding a comment note from Daniel was that the UMH lock is *not* > > needed on the direct firmware loading case, he's lazy to remove it > > now so he'll just add a comment. > > IIRC, we hadn't really settle on what the right solution is or I couldn't > parse it. That is why I am asking specifically which version is the right > thing. Don't worry I don't want to shortcut here :) The removal of the lock from the general case is the right thing, I however wanted Ming to also acknowledge this change, I suppose he can do so if you supply a respin, or you can wait. Luis
Powered by blists - more mailing lists