linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] blk-iocost: fix sleeping in atomic context warnning

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: <Y31sYFdA2lHIvjt3@slm.duckdns.org>
Date:   Tue, 22 Nov 2022 14:42:08 -1000
From:   Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc:     Yu Kuai <yukuai1@...weicloud.com>, hch@....de,
        josef@...icpanda.com, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        yi.zhang@...wei.com, "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] blk-iocost: fix sleeping in atomic context
 warnning

On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 05:14:29PM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >> Then match_strdup() and kfree() in match_NUMBER() can be replaced with
> >> get_buffer() and put_buffer().
> > 
> > Sorry about the late reply. Yeah, something like this.
> 
> Doesn't local_irq_disable() imply preemption disable as well?

Right, I was thinking about spin_lock_irq() which doesn't imply disabling
preemption in PREEMPT_RT. local_irq_disable() is actual irq disable even on
RT. It should be fine on its own.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun