[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Yzaj0wBz8uRXU5S/@alley>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2022 10:07:47 +0200
From: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
To: John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com>,
Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>,
Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
kgdb-bugreport@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH printk 09/18] serial: kgdboc: Lock console list in probe
function
On Sat 2022-09-24 02:10:45, John Ogness wrote:
> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
>
> Unprotected list walks are not necessarily safe.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Signed-off-by: John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>
> Reviewed-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>
It looks correct in principle. There is still a discussion [1] whether
to introduce console_list_lock() or use the existing console_lock(),
see https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220924000454.3319186-7-john.ogness@linutronix.de
Depending on the result of the discussion, with either
console_list_lock() or console_lock():
Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Best Regards,
Petr
Powered by blists - more mailing lists