linux-kernel - Re: [-mm patch] lockdep: possible deadlock in sysfs

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: <200701051753.05168.oliver@neukum.org>
Date:	Fri, 5 Jan 2007 17:53:04 +0100
From:	Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org>
To:	Frederik Deweerdt <deweerdt@...e.fr>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	greg@...ah.com, maneesh@...ibm.com, oliver@...kum.name
Subject: Re: [-mm patch] lockdep: possible deadlock in sysfs

Am Freitag, 5. Januar 2007 17:42 schrieb Frederik Deweerdt:
> On Fri, Jan 05, 2007 at 04:13:25PM +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > Am Freitag, 5. Januar 2007 13:16 schrieb Frederik Deweerdt:
> > > On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 10:02:00PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > 	ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.20-rc3/2.6.20-rc3-mm1/
> > > > 
> > are you sure there's a code path that takes these locks in the reverse order?
> > I've looked through the code twice and not found any. It doesn't make much
> > sense to first lock the file and afterwards the directory.
> You're right, an annotation should be enough, what do you think?

I agree.

	Regards
		Oliver
-
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/