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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2017 15:36:54 +0100 From: Michał Kępień <kernel@...pniu.pl> To: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net> Cc: "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Михаил Кринкин <krinkin.m.u@...il.com>, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] rfkill: Add rfkill-any LED trigger > On Mon, 2017-01-02 at 13:21 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > I'm not super happy with this conditional locking - can't we > > > instead > > > defer the necessary work to a workqueue, or so, for purposes of the > > > LED? > > > > Actually, since you can sleep in here, and do various other things > > like scheduling etc. this can't even be correct as is - one thread > > might be in the probe and another might also attempt to do some > > operations that require the lock but now don't take it. > > Additionally, this doesn't address the "can be called in any context" > part, only the "even from within rfkill callbacks" part. It's clearly > still not safe to call this from any context that is not allowed to > sleep, for example. Thanks for reviewing. I will attempt a workqueue-based approach in v4. -- Best regards, Michał Kępień
Powered by blists - more mailing lists