netdev - Re: IrDA woes..

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: <20140102.190511.837169616985438729.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Thu, 02 Jan 2014 19:05:11 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Cc:	samuel@...tiz.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: IrDA woes..

From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2014 14:47:44 -0800

> You could use spin_lock_bh(), but if it's true that it's all in a
> softirq context, I think it should be safe to just do "spin_lock()".
> Afaik, there is nothing that actually does anything in real hardirq
> context in there. I *think* all the network _rcv() functions are
> called from softirqs, right?

I'm worried that mixing hardIRQ locking (via the direct calls to
skb_dequeue() et al.) with explicit softIRQ locking will make lockdep
complain.
--
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