linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] panic: Add panic_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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 25 Jan 2022 12:48:22 +0100
From:   Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
To:     Stephen Brennan <stephen.s.brennan@...cle.com>
Cc:     Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] panic: Add panic_in_progress helper

On Fri 2022-01-21 11:02:19, Stephen Brennan wrote:

Please, add explanation why the new helper is added. It will be
used in printk code to reduce risk of deadlocks during panic().

> Suggested-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Brennan <stephen.s.brennan@...cle.com>
> ---
> We cannot define a static inline without including linux/atomic.h, so
> I just added a macro for convenience in later patches. Since macros were
> the only option, I didn't include a helper for
> panic_in_progress_different_cpu().

What is the exact problem with including atomic.h and using static
inline, please?

IMHO, the define is not a real solution. The macro won't be usable
without including atomic.h. So, it would work only by chance.

But it is possible that I miss something.

Best Regards,
Petr