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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2021 23:37:04 +0000 From: Asmaa Mnebhi <asmaa@...dia.com> To: Corey Minyard <minyard@....org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: ipmi_msghandler.c question Hi Corey, I have a question for you related to the following function in ipmi_msghandler.c static void __get_guid(struct ipmi_smi *intf) { int rv; struct bmc_device *bmc = intf->bmc; bmc->dyn_guid_set = 2; intf->null_user_handler = guid_handler; rv = send_guid_cmd(intf, 0); if (rv) /* Send failed, no GUID available. */ bmc->dyn_guid_set = 0; else wait_event(intf->waitq, bmc->dyn_guid_set != 2); /* dyn_guid_set makes the guid data available. */ smp_rmb(); intf->null_user_handler = NULL; } Why is wait_event used as opposed to wait_event_timeout? In the context where the dyn_guid_set value doesn't change from 2, this would run forever. Wouldn't we want to timeout after a certain amount of time? Thanks. Asmaa
Powered by blists - more mailing lists