linux-kernel - Re: hrtimers and lockdep (was: Re: 2.6.24-rc6: possible recursive locking detected)

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.1.00.0801301835050.9204@apollo.tec.linutronix.de>
Date:	Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:36:12 +0100 (CET)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
cc:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: hrtimers and lockdep (was: Re: 2.6.24-rc6: possible recursive
 locking detected)

On Wed, 30 Jan 2008, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> ( trimmed CC list )
> 
> Sorry for the delay, this message seems to have gotten lost in my
> inbox :-/
> 
> On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 00:27 +0300, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 01/13, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> > Offtopic question. Why do we have so many lockdep stuff in timer.c and hrtimer.c ?
> > We never lock 2 bases at the same time, except in migrate_timers(). We can kill
> > double_spin_lock() and base_lock_keys[] and just use spin_lock_nested in
> > migrate_timers(), no?
> 
> Lets ask Thomas.. :-)

No objections as long as it all works :)

   tglx
--
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/