Am Monday 19 January 2009 21:58:22 schrieb David Brownell: > On Monday 19 January 2009, Alan Stern wrote: > > On Mon, 19 Jan 2009, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > > > > > The general policy with locking is that a given procedure > > > > should always work the same. If there are two different > > > > locking policies, there should be two different entry points. > > > > > > Basically, I don't think this is doable. > > I don't follow that comment. It's obviously doable in the > general case... Really? In every driver? I very much suspect a lot of drivers are vulnerable right now. [..] > > > Now I see three options. > > > > > > 1. Drivers need to cope with any context and any locks held. > > > This seems to be hardly practical to me. We'd beg for bugs. > > > > It's the situation we're in right now. So far there haven't been very > > many bugs. > > Haven't been many reports mostly by chance. Mass storage > could hit similar issues after scatterlist cleanup, ISTR. We don't see this because O/U/E-HCI don't do this. Regards Oliver -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
