linux-kernel - Re: [patch 2/2] lockdep: initialize lockdep debugging statistics

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]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0903060221500.25972@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date:	Fri, 6 Mar 2009 02:27:25 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] lockdep: initialize lockdep debugging statistics

On Fri, 6 Mar 2009, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> > Peter, this is purely a matter of good software engineering practices. 
> 
> For complex types I would agree, but atomic_t is assumed to be just
> another int - just with special ops. For such things we can hold that
> memset('0') will properly initialize them to their 0 value.
> 

That's the point about good software engineering practices: atomic_t 
should not be assumed to be another int.  If its implementation were ever 
to change even for a single architecture, so would these variable 
declarations.

> > I assume you wouldn't object to removing all such cases in the kernel.
> > 
> >         $ grep -r "atomic_t.*= ATOMIC_INIT(0)" * | wc -l
> >         104
> 
> Only IFF all those cases are for static/global storage.

They are.

Anyway, I've already deferred to your maintainership of lockdep about not 
wanting to initialize global atomics in this part of the kernel, so while 
I disagree with it from a software engineering perspective, I think I'll 
be able to 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/