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  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:	Fri, 12 Apr 2013 17:42:46 +0800
From:	Ming Lei <>
To:	Oliver Neukum <>
Cc:	Dan Williams <>,
	Elina Pasheva <>,
	Network Development <>,
	linux-usb <>,
	Rory Filer <>,
	Phil Sutter <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2 v5] usbnet: allow status interrupt URB to always be active

On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 2:37 PM, Oliver Neukum <> wrote:
>> The work will complete when memory is reclaimed, and the rx/tx path is
>> still working, so memory reclaim can continue and the deadlock may not
>> be caused, may it?
> Only if the memory allocation goes to the same interface. If the blocking interface
> is storage, something bad happens (data loss not deadlock)

OK, got it, it should be both since reset can't move on, so
memory reclaim can't complete to satisfy the allocation.

But I am wondering if it is a case which is worth the consideration.

Almost all USB probe() allocate memory with GFP_KERNEL, then
the similar scenario(data loss only this time) might happen too. Do we
need to fix all USB drivers?

Wrt. the usbnet_status_start() API, looks no good reason to call
it in another queue context, it should be enough to call it in probe() or
bind() if init_status() can be put before info->bind() in usbnet_probe().

Then looks the mem_flags isn't needed in both cases, and we should
always take GFP_NOIO inside the API?

Ming Lei
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists