[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161110211310.GX3117@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 22:13:10 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Cc: Elena Reshetova <elena.reshetova@...el.com>,
kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, keescook@...omium.org,
arnd@...db.de, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
h.peter.anvin@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v4 PATCH 00/13] HARDENED_ATOMIC
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 08:48:38PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> > That said, I still don't much like this.
> >
> > I would much rather you make kref useful and use that. It still means
> > you get to audit all refcounts in the kernel, but hey, you had to do
> > that anyway.
>
> What needs to happen to kref to make it useful? Like many others, I've
> been guilty of using atomic_t for refcounts in the past.
As it stands kref is a pointless wrapper. If it were to provide
something actually useful, like wrap protection, then it might actually
make sense to use it.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
