linux-kernel - Re: [patch 2/5] infrastructure to debug (dynamic) objects

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 24 Mar 2008 13:04:54 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, greg@...ah.com,
	randy.dunlap@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [patch 2/5] infrastructure to debug (dynamic) objects

On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 20:26:18 -0000
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:

> The debugobjects core code keeps track of operations on static and
> dynamic objects by inserting them into a hashed list and sanity
> checking them on object operations and provides additional checks
> whenever kernel memory is freed.

Prime candidates for conversion to this interface are locks: spinlocks,
rwlocks, mutexes, etc.

a) it'd be interesting to get that done, as a proof-of-usefulness thing.

b) but this code internally uses spinlocks.  Will it explode?

also list_heads and hlists.  But

a) that might be a bit redundant against the custome debugging which lists
   already have and

b) this code uses lists and hlists internally?
--
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/