linux-kernel - Re: locking hierarchy based on lockdep

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: <20061106200529.GA15370@elte.hu>
Date:	Mon, 6 Nov 2006 21:05:29 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, arjan@...radead.org
Subject: Re: locking hierarchy based on lockdep


* Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com> wrote:

> I've implemented this as a /proc file, but Ingo suggested that it 
> might be better for us to simply produce an adjaceny list, and then 
> generate a locking hierarchy or anything else of interest off of that 
> list.... [...]

this would certainly be the simplest thing to do - we could extend 
/proc/lockdep with the list of 'immediately after' locks separated by 
commas. (that list already exists: it's the lock_class.locks_after list)

i like your idea of using lockdep to document locking hierarchies.

	Ingo
-
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/