Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2016 18:56:00 +0330 From: mokhi <mokhi64@gmail.com> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: thread-unsafety problems as spl*() ones are NOP Message-ID: <CAByVWPWQJ1wP95S59SiWWBa0k9j2%2Bu1az-D04_V1voo99CxqCw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAByVWPWuqdtZ-5p2%2BvGf4v%2BPjjCBkiTQSsZQ06vk-f=bx_TQrQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAByVWPWuqdtZ-5p2%2BvGf4v%2BPjjCBkiTQSsZQ06vk-f=bx_TQrQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi. in kbd.c there are many places spltty()/splx() used assuming it locks/unlocks. though there is bug filed for this, and ive asked in #bsddev, Ive preferred to ask and ensure it from here again. As these functions are obsoleted now, this assumption is incorrect and some places we have thread-unsafely which leads to security problems (and/or for example double-free, etc) can i use mutex/spin/lock/unlock under where assumed a lock/unlock by using spltty()/splx() to patch it? Thanks, Mokhi.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAByVWPWQJ1wP95S59SiWWBa0k9j2%2Bu1az-D04_V1voo99CxqCw>