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: <20061109091554.GB23876@elte.hu>
Date:	Thu, 9 Nov 2006 10:15:55 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, arjan@...radead.org,
	rdreier@...co.com
Subject: Re: locking hierarchy based on lockdep


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

> You are right though, i think that the data in the locks after lists 
> is sufficient to re-create the entire graph, since its acyclic, but by 
> simply printing out nodes of distance '1', the algorithm is greatly 
> simplified. Otherwise, i'd have to first reconstruct the graph...

but ... the locks_after list should really only include locks that are 
taken immediately after. I.e. there should only be 'distance 1' locks.

	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/