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: <20120320022812.GA30406@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
Date:	Mon, 19 Mar 2012 19:28:12 -0700
From:	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	xfs-masters@....sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/11] XFS: Fix lock ASSERT on UP

> 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?

You should regularly test with lockdep anyways. If you don't you clearly
have a testing gap. lockdep is likely to find many more locking bugs
than any of your very sparse manual annotations.

> That means it will rarely get checked during development instead of
> all the time. That's not an improvement IMO....

It's an improvement that an !CONFIG_SMP && CONFIG_XFS_DEBUG kernel
will not blow up anymore.

-Andi
--
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/