linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 04/33] vt: More locking checks

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:   Mon, 27 May 2019 09:22:14 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        DRI Development <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...el.com>,
        Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>,
        Martin Hostettler <textshell@...uujin.de>,
        Adam Borowski <kilobyte@...band.pl>,
        Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/33] vt: More locking checks

On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 09:08:58AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 10:53:25AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > I honestly have no idea what the subtle differences between
> > con_is_visible, con_is_fg (internal to vt.c) and con_is_bound are. But
> > it looks like both vc->vc_display_fg and con_driver_map are protected
> > by the console_lock, so probably better if we hold that when checking
> > this.
> > 
> > To do that I had to deinline the con_is_visible function.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...el.com>
> > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
> > Cc: Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>
> > Cc: Martin Hostettler <textshell@...uujin.de>
> > Cc: Adam Borowski <kilobyte@...band.pl>
> > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>
> > Cc: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>
> 
> Hi Greg,
> 
> Do you want to merge this through your console tree or ack for merging
> through drm/fbdev? It's part of a bigger series, and I'd like to have more
> testing with this in our trees, but also ok to merge stand-alone if you
> prefer that. It's just locking checks and some docs.
> 
> Same for the preceeding patch in this series here.

For all of these, please take them through your tree(s):

Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>