linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] Increase lockdep limits: MAX_STACK_TRACE

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: <1247082989.16156.19.camel@laptop>
Date:	Wed, 08 Jul 2009 21:56:29 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	Joao Correia <joaomiguelcorreia@...il.com>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Américo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Increase lockdep limits: MAX_STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES

On Wed, 2009-07-08 at 20:48 +0100, Joao Correia wrote:
> 
> 
> Im in no way pretending to understand all the details on this system,
> but i do know there has been, as of late, an effort to make the init
> process do more things at once, ie, load more modules in parallel to
> speed up the process. Can't that be at least partially responsible for
> this? Even if its just making some other problem more obvious?

Nah, lockdep serializes all that under a single lock ;-)

module unloading in particular wastes resources from a lockdep pov, so
as long as that doesn't happen, we're good.

--
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/