linux-kernel - Re: [1/4] pwm: omap-dmtimer: remove pwmchip in .remove before making it unfunctional

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 11 Nov 2019 22:00:23 +0100
From:   Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To:     Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
        linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>,
        Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com>,
        kernel@...gutronix.de, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [1/4] pwm: omap-dmtimer: remove pwmchip in .remove before making
 it unfunctional

>>> In the old code (e.g.) mutex_destroy() was called before
>>> pwmchip_remove(). Between these two calls it is possible that a pwm
>>> callback is used which tries to grab the mutex.
>>
>> How do you think about to add a more “imperative mood” for your
>> change description?
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?id=31f4f5b495a62c9a8b15b1c3581acd5efeb9af8c#n151
>
> I described the old behaviour and like my wording.

I find that the first paragraph contains useful information.
Would you like to specify any corresponding actions then
at this place?

Regards,
Markus