linux-kernel - Re: [GIT] Networking

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: <20100814.220945.232761341.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Sat, 14 Aug 2010 22:09:45 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT] Networking

From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 11:05:54 -0700

> Anyway, the lock warning I do get seems to be networking-related, and
> is appended. Does this ring any bells? It could easily be something
> old: I turn on lock debugging only when I look for bugs (or when
> people point out bugs that I've created :^/ )

This is a false positive but I have no idea how we can annotate
this to not trigger in lockdep.

These are per-cpu locks for counter management.

The get_counters() code knows that the locks for other cpu's counters
can only be taken in software interrupt context of that other cpu.  So
it is legal to turn software interrupts back on when grabbing their
locks in base context.

CC:'ing Eric Dumazet since he put the code the way it is now :-)
Via commit 24b36f0193467fa727b85b4c004016a8dae999b9
("netfilter: {ip,ip6,arp}_tables: dont block bottom half more than necessary")
--
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/