netdev - Re: usbnet: driver_info->stop required to stop USB interrupts?

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: <1395390724.5171.1.camel@linux-fkkt.site>
Date:	Fri, 21 Mar 2014 09:32:04 +0100
From:	Oliver Neukum <oneukum@...e.de>
To:	Julius Werner <jwerner@...omium.org>
Cc:	Grant Grundler <grundler@...gle.com>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Freddy Xin <freddy@...x.com.tw>,
	"linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
	Allan Chou <allan@...x.com.tw>
Subject: Re: usbnet: driver_info->stop required to stop USB interrupts?

On Thu, 2014-03-20 at 16:53 -0700, Julius Werner wrote:
> >> Can you please explain why we need to check if the waitqueue is active?
> >
> > and add a comment that answers the above question.
> 
> Ooooohhhhh.... the braces!!! Well, that's just mean...

Yes, I was unsure about this, but so it is.

> I expect that we don't really need the waitqueue_active() check there
> as long as we fix the patch to make sure the control flow in the rest
> of the statements actually stays the same. (That's why I really like
> to put comments for an else block next to or under the opening brace,
> instead of above with another empty line...)


We cannot. If the driver intends to shut down traffic then resubmission
in the bottom half must not happen. The check for the intention to shut
down is necessary.

	Regards
		Oliver



--
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