linux-kernel - [QUESTION] Bringing cross-release back to be alive

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 27 Feb 2018 17:26:00 +0900
From:   Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
To:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     kernel-team@....com, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: [QUESTION] Bringing cross-release back to be alive

Hello,

Cross-release introduced a false positive in some fs configs,
which was too hard to solve fundamentally - which requires to
distinguish between all dynamic instances.

I also think it better be removed than making fs developers
disable whole lockdep. But I believe that it's still helpful
in the rest of the configs.

Therefore, I want to bring it back after preventing bothering
them. I think we can achieve it by invalidating problematic
waiters at the moment producing a false positive and letting
them worked out finely later.

For example, in the case where we got trouble in, we can
initialize the completion in submit_bio_wait() with no-map
version. That way, we can achieve our goal easily for all
problems caused by cross-release in the future.

Of course, it would be the best if we solve the problems in a
right way later, but just leaving them invalidated would be
also fine because the cases are exactly same as before
applying cross-release.

I'm curious about what you think about that. If you say yes,
then I will re-summit after adding the work I mentioned above.

-- 
Thanks,
Byungchul