From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1752674AbdBOWMO (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Wed, 15 Feb 2017 17:12:14 -0500
Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:22141 "EHLO mga02.intel.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1752454AbdBOWMN (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 15 Feb 2017 17:12:13 -0500
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.35,167,1484035200"; 
   d="scan'208";a="65196091"
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 22:12:08 +0000
From: Giovanni Cabiddu <giovanni.cabiddu@intel.com>
To: Narayana Prasad Athreya <pathreya@caviumnetworks.com>
Cc: Seth Jennings <sjenning@redhat.com>,
        Mahipal Challa <mahipalreddy2006@gmail.com>,
        herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, davem@davemloft.net,
        linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, pathreya@cavium.com, vnair@cavium.com,
        Mahipal Challa <Mahipal.Challa@cavium.com>,
        Vishnu Nair <Vishnu.Nair@cavium.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 1/1] mm: zswap - Add crypto acomp/scomp framework
 support
Message-ID: <20170215221208.GA820@silv-gc1.ir.intel.com>
References: <1487086821-5880-1-git-send-email-Mahipal.Challa@cavium.com>
 <1487086821-5880-2-git-send-email-Mahipal.Challa@cavium.com>
 <CAC8qmcCt8VEX6QSSL35isN-nEvH-AJ2MAJHZy0TigxftsQN2jA@mail.gmail.com>
 <58A45E4A.8080508@caviumnetworks.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <58A45E4A.8080508@caviumnetworks.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 07:27:30PM +0530, Narayana Prasad Athreya wrote:
> > I assume all of these crypto_acomp_[compress|decompress] calls are
> > actually synchronous,
> > not asynchronous as the name suggests.  Otherwise, this would blow up
> > quite spectacularly
> > since all the resources we use in the call get derefed/unmapped below.
> > 
> > Could an async algorithm be implement/used that would break this assumption?
> 
> The callback is set to NULL using acomp_request_set_callback(). This implies
> synchronous mode of operation. So the underlying implementation must
> complete the operation synchronously.
This assumption is not correct. An asynchronous implementation, when
it finishes processing a request, will call acomp_request_complete() which
in turn calls the callback.
If the callback is set to NULL, this function will dereference a NULL
pointer.

Regards,

-- 
Giovanni