linux-kernel - Re: kmod: provide wrappers for kmod

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:   Tue, 10 Jan 2017 21:28:40 +0100
From:   "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>
To:     Jessica Yu <jeyu@...hat.com>
Cc:     "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>, shuah@...nel.org,
        rusty@...tcorp.com.au, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
        dmitry.torokhov@...il.com, acme@...hat.com, corbet@....net,
        martin.wilck@...e.com, mmarek@...e.com, pmladek@...e.com,
        hare@...e.com, rwright@....com, jeffm@...e.com, DSterba@...e.com,
        fdmanana@...e.com, neilb@...e.com, linux@...ck-us.net,
        rgoldwyn@...e.com, subashab@...eaurora.org, xypron.glpk@....de,
        keescook@...omium.org, atomlin@...hat.com, mbenes@...e.cz,
        paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, dan.j.williams@...el.com,
        jpoimboe@...hat.com, davem@...emloft.net, mingo@...hat.com,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: kmod: provide wrappers for kmod_concurrent inc/dec

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 09:07:21PM -0800, Jessica Yu wrote:
> +++ Luis R. Rodriguez [08/12/16 11:48 -0800]:
> > diff --git a/kernel/kmod.c b/kernel/kmod.c
> > index cb6f7ca7b8a5..049d7eabda38 100644
> > --- a/kernel/kmod.c
> > +++ b/kernel/kmod.c
> > @@ -108,6 +111,20 @@ static int call_modprobe(char *module_name, int wait)
> > 	return -ENOMEM;
> > }
> > 
> > +static int kmod_umh_threads_get(void)
> > +{
> > +	atomic_inc(&kmod_concurrent);
> > +	if (atomic_read(&kmod_concurrent) < max_modprobes)
> 
> Should this not be <=? I think this only allows up to max_modprobes-1 concurrent threads.

True, fixed!

  Luis