linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/7] liblock: public headers for mutex implementation

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:	Fri, 1 Feb 2013 10:57:01 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>
Cc:	mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, paulus@...ba.org,
	acme@...stprotocols.net, penberg@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] liblock: public headers for mutex implementation


* Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com> wrote:

> These headers provide the same API as their pthread mutex counterparts.
> 
> The design here is to allow to easily switch to liblock lock validation
> just by adding a "liblock_" to pthread_mutex_*() calls, which means that
> it's easy to integrate liblock into existing codebases.

I'd suggest to name the user-space counterpart 'liblockdep', to 
make it clear that this is user-space lockdep.

Regarding pthread_mutex_t checking, I think what we *really* 
want is a wrapper that can be activated via:

#define __USE_LIBLOCKDEP

And which then takes over the pthread primitives via:

  #define pthread_mutex_lock liblockdep_pthread_mutex_lock

or so.

That way the source code only needs a __USE_LIBLOCKDEP in one or 
two key places and checking is activated.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/