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  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, 11 May 2022 08:26:33 +0900
From:   Byungchul Park <>
To:     Steven Rostedt <>
Cc:     Hyeonggon Yoo <>,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v6 00/21] DEPT(Dependency Tracker)

On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 10:12:54AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 10 May 2022 08:38:38 +0900
> Byungchul Park <> wrote:
> > Yes, I was talking about A and L'.
> > 
> > > detect that regardless of L. A nested lock associates the the nesting with  
> > 
> > When I checked Lockdep code, L' with depth n + 1 and L' with depth n
> > have different classes in Lockdep.
> If that's the case, then that's a bug in lockdep.

Yes, agree. I should've said 'Lockdep doesn't detect it currently.'
rather than 'Lockdep can't detect it.'.

I also think we make it for this case by fixing the bug in Lockdep.

> > 
> > That's why I said Lockdep cannot detect it. By any chance, has it
> > changed so as to consider this case? Or am I missing something?
> No, it's not that lockdep cannot detect it, it should detect it. If it is
> not detecting it, then we need to fix that.


> -- Steve

Powered by blists - more mailing lists