linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] staging: r8188eu: Use kzalloc() with GFP

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]

Message-ID: <20211105153633.GD2026@kadam>
Date:   Fri, 5 Nov 2021 18:36:33 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:     "Fabio M. De Francesco" <fmdefrancesco@...il.com>
Cc:     Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>,
        Phillip Potter <phil@...lpotter.co.uk>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] staging: r8188eu: Use kzalloc() with GFP_ATOMIC in
 atomic context

Oh yeah, you're right.  It never *just* does spinlocks (as stated in the
commit message btw), it does spin_lock_bh() which bumps the soft IRQ
count.

> To summarize, I think that using in_interrupt() in the old wrappers was the 
> wiser choice.

"Wiser" is not the right word.  The wrappers were always stupid, but I
guess they did work in this case so the fixes tag is correct.

regards,
dan carpenter