From: Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@linux.microsoft.com>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org
Cc: eric.snowberg@oracle.com, dhowells@redhat.com,
mathew.j.martineau@linux.intel.com, matthewgarrett@google.com,
sashal@kernel.org, jamorris@linux.microsoft.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] IMA: Define workqueue for early boot "key" measurements
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2019 07:51:37 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9938ff03-5cf2-5396-1172-5734cc10819e@linux.microsoft.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1576242406.4579.239.camel@linux.ibm.com>
On 12/13/19 5:06 AM, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> I just need to convince myself that this is correct. Normally before
> reading and writing a flag, there is some sort of locking. With
> taking the mutex before setting the flag, there is now only a lock
> around the single writer.
>
> Without taking a lock before reading the flag, will the queue always
> be empty is the question. If it is, then the comment is correct, but
> the code assumes not and processes the list again. Testing the flag
> after taking the mutex just re-enforces the comment.
>
> Bottom line, does reading the flag need to be lock protected?
>
> Mimi
>
I'll change this function to check the flag again after taking the lock
and process only if the queue has entries. Will send an update today.
Please let me know if you have any concern in other functions in this
file. I'll address them, if any, in today's update.
thanks,
-lakshmi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-12-13 20:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-13 0:42 [PATCH v3 0/2] IMA: Deferred measurement of keys Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-12-13 0:42 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] IMA: Define workqueue for early boot "key" measurements Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-12-13 1:55 ` Mimi Zohar
2019-12-13 1:59 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-12-13 2:32 ` Mimi Zohar
2019-12-13 2:59 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-12-13 13:06 ` Mimi Zohar
2019-12-13 15:51 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian [this message]
2019-12-15 12:44 ` Mimi Zohar
2019-12-13 0:42 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] IMA: Call workqueue functions to measure queued keys Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
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=9938ff03-5cf2-5396-1172-5734cc10819e@linux.microsoft.com \
--to=nramas@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=eric.snowberg@oracle.com \
--cc=jamorris@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=keyrings@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathew.j.martineau@linux.intel.com \
--cc=matthewgarrett@google.com \
--cc=sashal@kernel.org \
--cc=zohar@linux.ibm.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).