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: <1247159251.7529.1.camel@twins>
Date:	Thu, 09 Jul 2009 19:07:31 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
Cc:	Joao Correia <joaomiguelcorreia@...il.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Américo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	"joerg.roedel" <joerg.roedel@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Increase lockdep limits: MAX_STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES

On Thu, 2009-07-09 at 12:10 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 10:02:36AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>  > On Thu, 2009-07-09 at 00:39 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
>  > > On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 08:36:04PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>  > >  > Looking at a lockdep dump hch gave me I can see that that is certainly
>  > >  > possible, I see tons of very deep callchains.
>  > >  > 
>  > >  > /me wonders if we're getting significantly deeper..
>  > > 
>  > > Looking at /proc/lockdep, I'm curious..
>  > > Take a look at http://davej.fedorapeople.org/lockdep
>  > > scroll down to c12c0924
>  > > 
>  > > What's up with all those old_style_spin_init's ?
>  > 
>  > What kernel are you running?
> 
> ..31rc2
> 
>  > Does your lib/dma_debug.c:dma_debug_init()
>  > have spin_lock_init() in that HASH_SIZE loop?
> 
> it's doing it by hand..
> 
>  717         for (i = 0; i < HASH_SIZE; ++i) {
>  718                 INIT_LIST_HEAD(&dma_entry_hash[i].list);
>  719                 dma_entry_hash[i].lock = SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED;
>  720         }

Hmm, that's the problem, it should read:

        for (i = 0; i < HASH_SIZE; ++i) {
                INIT_LIST_HEAD(&dma_entry_hash[i].list);
                spin_lock_init(&dma_entry_hash[i].lock);
        }

and does in -tip, so maybe Ingo took that patch, but I thought Joerg
would push that Linus wards. Joerg?

--
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/