linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] Synaptics

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]

Message-Id: <1158246237.2931.33.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
Date:	Thu, 14 Sep 2006 17:03:57 +0200
From:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To:	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Cc:	Jiri Kosina <jikos@...os.cz>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Synaptics - fix lockdep warnings

On Thu, 2006-09-14 at 10:58 -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On 9/14/06, Jiri Kosina <jikos@...os.cz> wrote:
> > On Thu, 14 Sep 2006, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> >
> > > Can we add lock_class_key to the struct psmouse and use it to define
> > > per-device mutex class regardless of whether it is a child, grandchild
> > > or a parent?
> >
> > Hi Dmitry,
> >
> > what do you think about the patches below? I have used a slightly
> > different approach, as we also need to get rid of the spurious lockdep
> > warning in case of recursive call of serio_interrupt(), which can't be
> > handled well with lock subclass stored in struct psmouse. What do you
> > think about this? It shuts up the lockdep, and seems much cleaner to me.
> >
> 
> Yes, this is much, much better. Could you please tell me if depth
> should be a true depth or just an unique number? The reason I am
> asking is that I hope to get rid of parent/child pointers in serio
> (they were introduced when driver core could not handle recursive
> addition/removing of devices on the same bus).

lockdep sort of expects the depth to be a number between 0 and 7.
Other than that lockdep does not assume an ordering based on numerical
value at all; it figures that out at runtime. 


-
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/