linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] ide/Falcon: Remove in

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20201123194610.df0431a228d5f6fe2d1e7719@linux-foundation.org>
Date:   Mon, 23 Nov 2020 19:46:10 -0800
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc:     linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] ide/Falcon: Remove in_interrupt() usage.

On Sat, 21 Nov 2020 13:44:24 +0100 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de> wrote:

> On 2020-11-20 14:35:35 [-0800], Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 20 Nov 2020 10:24:20 +0100 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de> wrote:
> > 
> > > falconide_get_lock() is called by ide_lock_host() and its caller
> > > (ide_issue_rq()) has already a might_sleep() check.
> > > 
> > > stdma_lock() has wait_event() which also has a might_sleep() check.
> > > 
> > > Remove the in_interrupt() check.
> > > 
> > > ...
> > >
> > > --- a/drivers/ide/falconide.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/ide/falconide.c
> > > @@ -51,8 +51,6 @@ static void falconide_release_lock(void)
> > >  static void falconide_get_lock(irq_handler_t handler, void *data)
> > >  {
> > >  	if (falconide_intr_lock == 0) {
> > > -		if (in_interrupt() > 0)
> > > -			panic("Falcon IDE hasn't ST-DMA lock in interrupt");
> > >  		stdma_lock(handler, data);
> > >  		falconide_intr_lock = 1;
> > >  	}
> > 
> > The current mainline falconide_get_lock() is very different:
> 
> I have this patch on-top of next-20201120 so it should apply. You
> realize that the above hunk is against falconide_get_lock() while
> the below is falconide_release_lock().
> If there is something wrong with the patch (or its commit message) I'm
> sorry but I don't understand your signal :)
> 

oops, sorry, the MIME-encoded email messed me up, then I went and
confused myself.  Got it now, thanks ;)