Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: Add overflow protection to kref

[Djalal Harouni]

On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 11:37:19PM +0400, Vasiliy Kulikov wrote:
> pattern, otherwise it is not a true refcounter :)  It should be straightforward to
> move to kref.
> 
> 
> Moving to atomic64_t is attractive, but:
> 
> 1) we still should find all atomic_t refcounters.  Why not move to kref then?
> 
> 2) what to do with architectures-loosers?
There is lib/atomic64.c but with a static hashed array of raw_spinlocks.

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> -- 
> Vasiliy Kulikov
> http://www.openwall.com - bringing security into open computing environments
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

-- 
tixxdz
http://opendz.org
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/