linux-kernel - Re: lockdep WARNING for run_timer

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:	Wed, 05 Sep 2012 19:09:07 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: lockdep WARNING for run_timer_softirq()

On Wed, 2012-09-05 at 10:20 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> Well, the branch tracer was active. That means all 'if()'s were being
> traced. It comes down to how you define 'if' ;-) 

Yeah, I tried making an argument for:

  we tell lockdep irqs are enabled hit an if() end up in lockdep code
through the branch tracer and find borken state, or vice-versa.

Just couldn't find it in the provided stack-trace. Might be I didn't
look hard enough, might be there's something else entirely.

All I know is I've never seen it on real hardware, then again, I hardly
ever have CONFIG_PARAVIRT or CONFIG_TRACE_BRANCH_PROFILING, let alone
both.

--
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/