linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH UPDATED] workqueue: relax lockdep annotation on flush

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: <1294068545.2016.85.camel@laptop>
Date:	Mon, 03 Jan 2011 16:29:05 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH UPDATED] workqueue: relax lockdep annotation on
 flush_work()

On Mon, 2011-01-03 at 16:20 +0100, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 03, 2011 at 04:14:45PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > Hmmm?  The code applies the most strict contraints.  If the workqueue
> > > has a rescuer, flushing another work from the workqueue will always
> > > trigger lockdep warning.  The rule is relaxed only for workqueues
> > > which aren't used for memory reclaiming && support parallel execution.
> > 
> > Ah, ok. I read it like: if the current thread is a rescue thread.
> 
> Ah, I see.  Rafael, can you please verify the updated version is okay
> too (it should be but just in case)?  Peter, shall I route this
> through workqueue tree with your ack?

That's fine with me, thanks!
--
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/