From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: Ashutosh Naik <ashutosh.naik@gmail.com>
Cc: Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com>,
anandhkrishnan@yahoo.co.in, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
rth@redhat.com, akpm@osdl.org, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Prevent overriding of Symbols in the Kernel, avoiding Undefined behaviour
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 10:02:07 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1134601327.7773.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <81083a450512132146g1177b457q5fd6cc5685a3d3b3@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, 2005-12-14 at 11:16 +0530, Ashutosh Naik wrote:
> On 12/14/05, Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> wrote:
> > We already do this to resolve (more) symbols, so I don't see it as a
> > problem. However, I believe that lock is redundant here: we need both
> > locks to write the list, but either is sufficient for reading, and we
> > already hold the sem.
>
> Was just wondering, in that case, if we really need the spinlock in
> resolve_symbol() function, where there exists a spinlock around the
> __find_symbol() function
Yes, I think that's redundant as well. We're not altering the module
list itself, so either of the two locks is sufficient, and we have the
semaphore.
Patch welcome!
Rusty.
--
ccontrol: http://ozlabs.org/~rusty/ccontrol
prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-12-14 23:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-12-12 12:39 [RFC][PATCH] Prevent overriding of Symbols in the Kernel, avoiding Undefined behaviour Ashutosh Naik
2005-12-12 12:44 ` Ashutosh Naik
2005-12-12 22:25 ` Jesper Juhl
2005-12-13 8:23 ` Anand H. Krishnan
2005-12-12 19:13 ` Andrew Morton
2005-12-12 19:27 ` Richard Henderson
2005-12-12 20:20 ` Greg KH
2005-12-12 20:30 ` Jesper Juhl
2005-12-12 22:48 ` Alan Cox
2005-12-13 8:03 ` Arjan van de Ven
2005-12-13 14:32 ` Ashutosh Naik
2005-12-12 22:01 ` Rusty Russell
2005-12-13 14:26 ` Ashutosh Naik
2005-12-13 15:28 ` Ashutosh Naik
2005-12-13 16:49 ` [RFC][PATCH] " Jesper Juhl
2005-12-14 2:03 ` Rusty Russell
2005-12-14 4:10 ` Ashutosh Naik
2005-12-14 5:02 ` Ashutosh Naik
2005-12-15 4:40 ` Andrew Morton
2005-12-15 5:15 ` Rusty Russell
2005-12-15 5:45 ` Ashutosh Naik
2005-12-14 5:46 ` Ashutosh Naik
2005-12-14 23:02 ` Rusty Russell [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1134601327.7773.12.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=anandhkrishnan@yahoo.co.in \
--cc=ashutosh.naik@gmail.com \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=jesper.juhl@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rth@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.