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: <adapsc0l40x.fsf@cisco.com>
Date:	Mon, 06 Nov 2006 12:21:50 -0800
From:	Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	arjan@...radead.org
Subject: Re: locking hierarchy based on lockdep

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

Yes, it's definitely a cool idea.  I think the current implementation
is not that useful, since it jams all the unrelated kernel locks into
a single ordered list, when in fact many locks simply have no ordering
relationship at all because they're never both taken.  This makes the
list hard to read and in fact loses the information of which locks
have been taken together.

 - R.
-
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/