linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] printk: Update @console_may_schedule in console_trylock

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, 27 Feb 2024 22:07:08 +0530
From: Mukesh Ojha <quic_mojha@...cinc.com>
To: John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>, <pmladek@...e.com>,
        <rostedt@...dmis.org>, <senozhatsky@...omium.org>
CC: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] printk: Update @console_may_schedule in
 console_trylock_spinning()



On 2/26/2024 6:32 PM, John Ogness wrote:
> On 2024-02-26, Mukesh Ojha <quic_mojha@...cinc.com> wrote:
>> what if console_trylock_spinning() gets the lock which makes
>> console_may_schedule =1 and it is still schedulable ?
> 
> I am afraid I do not understand the question.
> 
> console_trylock_spinning() is only called from the printk caller
> context. In this context, console_may_schedule is always set to 0.
> 
> Only if another context acquires the console lock per sleeping wait,
> console_lock(), can console_may_schedule be set to 1.
> 
> Note that the value of console_may_schedule is only relevant for the
> console lock owner when console_unlock() is called. That is why its
> value is set when locking the console (or, with this patch, when
> transferring console lock ownerhip).

I overlooked it, thanks.
Patch LGTM.

Reviewed-by: Mukesh Ojha <quic_mojha@...cinc.com>

-Mukesh
> 
> John