linux-kernel - Re: remove cpu hotplug bustification in cpufreq.

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:	Sun, 23 Jul 2006 10:29:40 +0200
From:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, ashok.raj@...el.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, davej@...hat.com,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>
Subject: Re: remove cpu hotplug bustification in cpufreq.

Hi,

> > Well, I just got Ashok's trial patches which turns the thing into a rwsem 
> > as I outlined earlier.
> 
> Mark my words ;)
> 
> > I'll try them out. If they don't work, we should just delete the lock and 
> > go totally back to square 1.
> 
> rwsem conversion has the potential to merely hide the problem.  Ingo, does
> lockdep detect recursive down_read()?

lockdep detects and warns about those.

I think we're about equally skeptical about this; I'm extremely hesitant
about any place in the kernel that uses rwsems for anything other than a
performance tweak. I've ended up with a mental model of rwsems that
basically comes down to "you need to be able to replace it with a mutex
without breaking correctness". Now of course that model is somewhat of
an oversimplification, but not by that much...

Greetings,
   Arjan van de Ven
-
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/