linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] LOCKDEP: minor fix for debug_show_all

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]

Message-ID: <20081028082920.GK15734@elte.hu>
Date:	Tue, 28 Oct 2008 09:29:20 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	sniper <s3c24xx@...il.com>
Cc:	mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] LOCKDEP: minor fix for debug_show_all_locks()


* sniper <s3c24xx@...il.com> wrote:

> When we failed to get tasklist_lock eventually (count equals 0),
> we should only print " ignoring it.\n", and not print
> " locked it.\n" needlessly.

well spotted!

Minor nit:

> --- a/kernel/lockdep.c
> +++ b/kernel/lockdep.c
> @@ -3417,10 +3417,12 @@ retry:
>  		}
>  		printk(" ignoring it.\n");
>  		unlock = 0;
> +		goto print_locks;
>  	}
>  	if (count != 10)
>  		printk(" locked it.\n");
> 
> +print_locks:
>  	do_each_thread(g, p) {

please move the "if (count != 10)" line into the else section of the 
trylock, instead of introducing a label and a goto.

	Ingo
--
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/