linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] degrade severity of lockdep printk

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: <1237840355.24918.80.camel@twins>
Date:	Mon, 23 Mar 2009 21:32:35 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	Kyle McMartin <kyle@...artin.ca>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, mingo@...hat.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] degrade severity of lockdep printk

On Mon, 2009-03-23 at 16:28 -0400, Kyle McMartin wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 09:20:54PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > Please report it in that case and get us to increase the limit.
> > 
> 
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489563
> 
> Although I don't really see how this can be particularly fixed, since
> any workload that allocates a struct with a lock, initializes, and then
> eventually frees it a whole bunch of times will run out of lock_lists
> won't it?

Not if the lock init site doesn't change. Modules are the big exception,
cycling modules will run you out of lockdep space..

--
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/