linux-kernel - Re: Regression: WARNINGS and lockdep spews in 2.6.38-rc3+ (bisected).

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:	Thu, 3 Feb 2011 19:42:19 +0800
From:	Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@...il.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Nick Bowler <nbowler@...iptictech.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: Regression: WARNINGS and lockdep spews in 2.6.38-rc3+
 (bisected).

On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 11:33:04AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> How about we revert your patch and go back to not allowing
> del_timer_sync() from any interrupt context, 

The fact is there is someone want to use del_timer_sync()
in softirq context.
My patch is inspired by this http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/8/16/291
though in the end that issue is resolved by not using
del_timer_sync() in softirq.

> we can fix __dst_free by
> removing the need for cancel_delayed_work().
> 
> Are there any other del_timer_sync() callers from softirq?

I'm not sure about this.

IMHO, we don't need to make more restriction if we don't
have to.

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