linux-kernel - Re: [QUESTION] llist: Comment releasing 'must delete' restriction before traversing

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, 31 Jul 2018 18:38:09 +0900
From:   Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@....com,
        ying.huang@...el.com, mingo@...nel.org, jiangshanlai@...il.com,
        paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, josh@...htriplett.org,
        rostedt@...dmis.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
        joel@...lfernandes.org, len.brown@...el.com, glider@...gle.com,
        peter@...leysoftware.com, aik@...abs.ru
Subject: Re: [QUESTION] llist: Comment releasing 'must delete' restriction
 before traversing

On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 10:52:57AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 09:58:36AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> > In restrictive cases like only addtions happen but never deletion, can't
> > we safely traverse a llist? I believe llist can be more useful if we can
> > release the restriction. Can't we?
> 
> Yes you can, but I'm not sure it makes much sense to confuse the
> comments with this.
> 
> This really ends up in the 'you had better know what you're doing'
> category.

Partially agree with you. But why not add more explanation?

If you think the comment confuse us, then it's ok to keep it itself.

Thanks.