| 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: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 14:57:13 -0700 (PDT) From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> To: andrea@...ranet.com Cc: a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, davej@...hat.com, rdreier@...co.com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, jeremy@...p.org, hugh@...itas.com, mingo@...e.hu, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, arjan@...radead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] workaround minor lockdep bug triggered by mm_take_all_locks From: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@...ranet.com> Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 23:09:54 +0200 > On Mon, Aug 04, 2008 at 10:37:22PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > You're so wrong it not even funny. It reports about deadlocks before > > they happen. All it needs is to observe a lock order violation and it > > Now tell me how it helps to report them... It tells me the system has > crashed and where, it's not like I couldn't figure it out by myself > but just noticing nothing works and all cpus are spinning in some > spinlock slow path and pressing sysrq+t/p. It tells you about deadlock scenerios that you haven't even encoutered yet. It shows bugs for parallel code path sequences that have not even occurred yet. But I think you're beyond the point of being able to see why lockdep is valuable. So why don't we just move on. -- 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