On 9/28/20 5:13 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 04:41:47PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
On 9/26/20 10:29 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 05:47:14PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
7. Verified that the test module compiles in kunit env. and test
module can be loaded
On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 04:41:47PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 9/26/20 10:29 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 05:47:14PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
> > > 7. Verified that the test module compiles in kunit env. and test
> > >module can be loaded to run the test.
> >
> >
On 9/28/20 3:17 PM, Joel Fernandes wrote:
On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 01:34:31PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
On Sun, Sep 27, 2020 at 07:35:26PM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 05:47:14PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
This patch series is a result of discussion at the refcount_t BOF
the
On 9/26/20 10:33 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 06:13:37PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
On 9/25/20 5:52 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 05:47:14PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
-- Addressed Kees's comments:
1. Non-atomic counters renamed to counter_simple32 and counter_s
On 9/26/20 10:22 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 05:47:14PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
This patch series is a result of discussion at the refcount_t BOF
the Linux Plumbers Conference. In this discussion, we identified
a need for looking closely and investigating atomic_t usages in
the
On 9/26/20 10:29 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 05:47:14PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
7. Verified that the test module compiles in kunit env. and test
module can be loaded to run the test.
I meant write it using KUnit interfaces (e.g. KUNIT_EXPECT*(),
kunit_test_suite(),
On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 01:34:31PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 27, 2020 at 07:35:26PM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 05:47:14PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
> > > This patch series is a result of discussion at the refcount_t BOF
> > > the Linux Plumbers Conference. I
On Sun, Sep 27, 2020 at 07:35:26PM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 05:47:14PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
> > This patch series is a result of discussion at the refcount_t BOF
> > the Linux Plumbers Conference. In this discussion, we identified
> > a need for looking closely and
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 05:47:14PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
> This patch series is a result of discussion at the refcount_t BOF
> the Linux Plumbers Conference. In this discussion, we identified
> a need for looking closely and investigating atomic_t usages in
> the kernel when it is used strictly
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 06:13:37PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 9/25/20 5:52 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 05:47:14PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
> > > -- Addressed Kees's comments:
> > > 1. Non-atomic counters renamed to counter_simple32 and
> > > counter_simple64
> > >
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 05:47:14PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
>7. Verified that the test module compiles in kunit env. and test
> module can be loaded to run the test.
I meant write it using KUnit interfaces (e.g. KUNIT_EXPECT*(),
kunit_test_suite(), etc):
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/l
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 05:47:14PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
> This patch series is a result of discussion at the refcount_t BOF
> the Linux Plumbers Conference. In this discussion, we identified
> a need for looking closely and investigating atomic_t usages in
> the kernel when it is used strictly
On 9/25/20 5:52 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 05:47:14PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
-- Addressed Kees's comments:
1. Non-atomic counters renamed to counter_simple32 and counter_simple64
to clearly indicate size.
2. Added warning for counter_simple* usage and it should
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 05:47:14PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
> -- Addressed Kees's comments:
>1. Non-atomic counters renamed to counter_simple32 and counter_simple64
> to clearly indicate size.
>2. Added warning for counter_simple* usage and it should be used only
> when there is
This patch series is a result of discussion at the refcount_t BOF
the Linux Plumbers Conference. In this discussion, we identified
a need for looking closely and investigating atomic_t usages in
the kernel when it is used strictly as a counter without it
controlling object lifetimes and state chang
This patch series is a result of discussion at the refcount_t BOF
the Linux Plumbers Conference. In this discussion, we identifed
a need for looking closely and investigating atomic_t usages in
the kernel when it is used strictly as a counter wothout it
controlling object lifetimes and state change
16 matches
Mail list logo
