[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGXu5j+QnAuRGKpH7tqc7LGfQ_JvTDPW8XrrCdkjizt-z0=vvw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 17:11:38 -0800
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: David Windsor <dwindsor@...il.com>
Cc: Elena Reshetova <elena.reshetova@...el.com>,
"kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <h.peter.anvin@...el.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Hans Liljestrand <ishkamiel@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFCv2 PATCH 09/18] net: convert from atomic_t to refcount_t
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 10:39 AM, David Windsor <dwindsor@...il.com> wrote:
> The relevant part of the patch has been cut off, but it appears that
> you've fixed some of the issues we identified earlier as corner cases
> as to reference counting in net/. In particular, inetpeer.c has its
> own garbage collection system in place which frees shared objects when
> their reference count became -1 (rather than 0). The proposed
> solution was to do a global +1 on this refcounting scheme, then
> replace unsupported atomic_*() functions with appropriate refcount_*()
> calls.
>
> When submitting this to netdev, it may make sense to separate out
> these changes: first, do a global +1 (while still using atomic_t),
> then convert to refcount_t. I'm already working on this now, but I
> didn't know if you wanted to follow this approach or not.
David, if you've got the global +1 patches ready, let's start feeding
those to netdev ASAP. We can convert them to refcount_t more easily
after that.
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Nexus Security
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.
