linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] lockdep vs recursive read locks

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]

Date:	Thu, 13 Mar 2008 11:25:28 +0000 (GMT)
From:	Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] lockdep vs recursive read locks

On Wed, 12 Mar 2008, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> We seemed to have some lockdep trouble wrt recursive read locks. Today Gautham
> asked me some specific questions about it, which led to these patches.
> 
> IIRC Hugh ran into something similar a while back. This hopefully fixes it.

Hmm, I don't remember that myself: can you jog my memory?

What I do remember is that when I fixed madvise(MADV_REMOVE i.e. holepunch)
not to hold mmap_sem (at that time down_write but today down_read, though
would still be bad) across vmtruncate_range which takes i_mutex (contrast
writing from an unfaulted area that takes i_mutex then down_read mmap_sem),
Ingo asked me offline if lockdep caught that and it didn't.  Just tried
again now, with your patches applied, and madvise_remove restored to its
old misbehaviour, and it looks like lockdep still doesn't catch it
(but suspect me of pilot error if you find otherwise).

Hugh
--
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/