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  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:   Sat, 28 Oct 2017 06:58:54 -0700
From:   Davidlohr Bueso <>
To:     Hou Tao <>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/8] epoll: remove epmutex from ep_free() &

On Sat, 28 Oct 2017, Hou Tao wrote:

>Remove the global epmutex from ep_free() and eventpoll_release_file().
>In the later patches, we will add locks with a smaller granularity
>to serve the same purposes of epmutex.
>Signed-off-by: Hou Tao <>
> fs/eventpoll.c | 4 ----
> 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
>diff --git a/fs/eventpoll.c b/fs/eventpoll.c
>index 2fabd19..26ab0c5 100644
>--- a/fs/eventpoll.c
>+++ b/fs/eventpoll.c
>@@ -835,7 +835,6 @@ static void ep_free(struct eventpoll *ep)
> 	 * anymore. The only hit might come from eventpoll_release_file() but
> 	 * holding "epmutex" is sufficient here.
> 	 */
What about this comment (and the equivalent one in eventpoll_release_file()?

>-	mutex_lock(&epmutex);

...even if you fix it in a later patch, this patch breaks bisection. Now
we just race between ep_free() and eventpoll_release_file(). This patch
should be folded in, no?


Powered by blists - more mailing lists