linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.18-git21, possible recursive locking in kseriod ends up in DWARF2 unwinder stuck

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: <d120d5000610051334o7604b1d4hd2f4c9a9b858f06e@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 5 Oct 2006 16:34:02 -0400
From:	"Dmitry Torokhov" <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To:	"Jiri Kosina" <jikos@...os.cz>
Cc:	"Alessandro Suardi" <alessandro.suardi@...il.com>,
	"Linux Kernel" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Peter Zijlstra" <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: 2.6.18-git21, possible recursive locking in kseriod ends up in DWARF2 unwinder stuck

On 10/4/06, Jiri Kosina <jikos@...os.cz> wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Oct 2006, Alessandro Suardi wrote:
>
> > Non-fatal (box is still alive and apparently well) on boot,
> > FC5-uptodate on a Dell Latitude C640. From the dmesg ring:
>
> > [    8.680000] =============================================
> > [    8.680000] [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
> > [    8.680000] 2.6.18-git21 #1
> > [    8.680000] ---------------------------------------------
> > [    8.680000] kseriod/163 is trying to acquire lock:
> > [    8.680000]  (&ps2dev->cmd_mutex/1){--..}, at: [<c03198c3>]
> > ps2_command+0x89/0x358
>
> Me and Peter Zijlstra have already submitted patches to fix this - read
> the thread at
> http://linux.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/Kernel/2006-09/msg07416.html
>
> I don't know the reason why these have not yet been merged into the input
> tree. Dmitry?
>

Sorry, was a little busy.

I tested the patches and they work. Couple of comments:

- register_lock_class is marked as inline but now has 2 call sites and
is relatively big - might want to remove "inline"
- how about adding lockdep_set_subclass() to avoid littering source
with struct lock_class_key when we only want to tweak subclass? For
that we might want export register_lock_class and hide it behind a
#define...

-- 
Dmitry
-
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/