| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 23:49:49 +0200
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wireless: wl12xx, fix lock imbalance
On Mon, 2009-07-13 at 23:44 +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> > I've had local hacks
> > many times to make sparse aware of mutexes, is there a reason they are
> > not annotated with __acquire(s)/__release(s) like spinlocks etc.?
>
> Mutexes are often locked/unlocked interprocedural which I think sparse
> can't do much about.
Well, you annotate those functions too, of course.
johannes
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (802 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists