linux-kernel - Re: lockdep warning: console vs. mem hotplug

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, 24 Mar 2017 21:00:19 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
Cc:     Sebastian Ott <sebott@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: lockdep warning: console vs. mem hotplug

On Sat, 25 Mar 2017 09:00:05 +0900
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com> wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> On (03/24/17 12:39), Steven Rostedt wrote:
> [..]
> > Is there a stack trace of where the lockdep dump happened? That is
> > useful too. Otherwise we don't see where the inverse happened.  
> 
> Steven, isn't it the inversion I describe in [1] (after the first lockdep
> warning)?
> 
> [1] lkml.kernel.org/r/20170321044421.GB448@...dpanzerIV.localdomain
>

Yeah, I believe you are right. I just wanted to make sure. It's the
same backtrace as the "(&(&sclp_con_lock)->rlock){-.-...}:" dump, but I
wanted to make sure.

-- Steve