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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 00:44:58 +0100 From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: How to avoid spurious lockdep warnings? On Thu, 2008-03-20 at 16:02 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > In a Xen system, when a new pagetable is about to be put in use it is > "pinned", meaning that each page in the pagetable is registered with the > hypervisor. This is done in arch/x86/xen/mmu.c:pin_page(). > > In order to make this efficient, the hypercalls for pinning are batched, > so that multiple pages are submitted at once in a single multicall. > While a page is batched pending the hypercall, its corresponding > pte_lock is held. > > This means that the code can end up holding multiple pte locks at once, > though it is guaranteed to never try to hold the same lock at once. > However, because these locks are in the same lock class, I get a > spurious warning from lockdep. Is there some way I can get rid of this > warning? How many locks at once? -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists