linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 02/10] locking/mutex: introduce devm_mutex

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: Thu, 7 Mar 2024 12:34:55 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: George Stark <gnstark@...utedevices.com>
Cc: pavel@....cz, lee@...nel.org, vadimp@...dia.com, mpe@...erman.id.au, 
	npiggin@...il.com, christophe.leroy@...roup.eu, hdegoede@...hat.com, 
	mazziesaccount@...il.com, peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com, 
	will@...nel.org, longman@...hat.com, boqun.feng@...il.com, 
	nikitos.tr@...il.com, kabel@...nel.org, linux-leds@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, 
	kernel@...utedevices.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 02/10] locking/mutex: introduce devm_mutex_init

On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 4:40 AM George Stark <gnstark@...utedevices.com> wrote:
>
> Using of devm API leads to a certain order of releasing resources.
> So all dependent resources which are not devm-wrapped should be deleted
> with respect to devm-release order. Mutex is one of such objects that
> often is bound to other resources and has no own devm wrapping.
> Since mutex_destroy() actually does nothing in non-debug builds
> frequently calling mutex_destroy() is just ignored which is safe for now
> but wrong formally and can lead to a problem if mutex_destroy() will be
> extended so introduce devm_mutex_init()
>
> Signed-off-by: George Stark <gnstark@...utedevices.com>
> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>

>  Hello Christophe. Hope you don't mind I put you SoB tag because you helped alot
>  to make this patch happen.

You also need to figure out who should be the author of the patch and
probably add a (missing) Co-developed-by. After all you should also
follow the correct order of SoBs.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko