netdev - Re: [PATCH kernel 2.6.35-rc3-git7] axnet_cs: use spin_lock_irqsave in ax

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: <20100712.200855.212405288.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Mon, 12 Jul 2010 20:08:55 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	bhutchings@...arflare.com
Cc:	ken_kawasaki@...ing.nifty.jp, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH kernel 2.6.35-rc3-git7] axnet_cs: use spin_lock_irqsave
 in ax_interrupt

From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2010 04:12:34 +0100

> But an interrupt handler will not be called recursively for the same
> IRQ.  Since this device only uses one IRQ, surely it was OK to use
> spin_lock() in this function so long as it was only called from the
> interrupt handler.

It seems your right, I'll make a note about the real reason we're
doing this in the commit message.

But frankly anything else is dangerous.  Especially if one intends to
support ->poll_controller() which we pretty much expect every modern
and future driver to do.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html