linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 05/11] XFS: Fix lock ASSERT on UP

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: <20120319224753.GC3592@dastard>
Date:	Tue, 20 Mar 2012 09:47:53 +1100
From:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
	xfs-masters@....sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/11] XFS: Fix lock ASSERT on UP

On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 12:00:58PM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
> From: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
> 
> ASSERT(!spin_is_locked()) doesn't work on UP builds. Replace with a standard
> lockdep_assert_held()
> 
> Cc: xfs-masters@....sgi.com
> Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
>  fs/xfs/xfs_iget.c |    4 ++--
>  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_iget.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_iget.c
> index 8c3e463..8654d78 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_iget.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_iget.c
> @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ xfs_inode_alloc(
>  	}
>  
>  	ASSERT(atomic_read(&ip->i_pincount) == 0);
> -	ASSERT(!spin_is_locked(&ip->i_flags_lock));
> +	lockdep_assert_held(&ip->i_flags_lock);
>  	ASSERT(!xfs_isiflocked(ip));
>  	ASSERT(ip->i_ino == 0);
>  
> @@ -147,7 +147,7 @@ xfs_inode_free(
>  
>  	/* asserts to verify all state is correct here */
>  	ASSERT(atomic_read(&ip->i_pincount) == 0);
> -	ASSERT(!spin_is_locked(&ip->i_flags_lock));
> +	lockdep_assert_held(&ip->i_flags_lock);
>  	ASSERT(!xfs_isiflocked(ip));

So this means we only ever check that the spinlock is held when
lockdep is turned on instead of whenever CONFIG_XFS_DEBUG is set?
That means it will rarely get checked during development instead of
all the time. That's not an improvement IMO....

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@...morbit.com
--
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/