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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <10415b9d-5051-47b1-8dee-9decc0d1539a@lunn.ch> Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2023 21:23:25 +0200 From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> To: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com> Cc: Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>, FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, tmgross@...ch.edu, miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com, wedsonaf@...il.com Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v7 1/5] rust: core abstractions for network PHY drivers > Now let's look back into struct phy_device, it does have a few locks > in it, and at least even with phydev->lock held, the content of > phydev->lock itself can be changed (e.g tick locks), hence it breaks the > requirement of the existence of a `&bindings::phy_device`. tick locks appear to be a Rust thing, so are unlikely to appear in a C structure. However, kernel C mutex does have a linked list of other threads waiting for the mutex. So phydev->lock can change at any time, even when held. Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists