linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] irq_flags_t: intro and core annotations

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 22 Oct 2007 23:46:19 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, matthew@....cx,
	ralf@...ux-mips.org, adobriyan@...il.com, viro@....linux.org.uk,
	viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] irq_flags_t: intro and core annotations

On Mon, 22 Oct 2007, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

> On Monday 22 October 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > It's almost always a bug to do spin_lock_irq() when local interrupts are
> > disabled. ��However iirc when we've tried to add runtime debugging to catch
> > that, it triggered false-positives which made the idea unworkable. ��I forget
> > where.
> 
> I tried this as well a few years ago, and I think I hit a few places in
> the early initialization, but nothing unfixable.

Hmm, lockdep checks this already. If it does not catch it, we need to fix it.

     tglx