linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] Btrfs, lockdep: get_restripe_target: use lockdep in BUG

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]

Date:	Thu, 5 Apr 2012 19:51:48 +0300
From:	Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@...il.com>
To:	Bobby Powers <bobbypowers@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@...e.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Btrfs, lockdep: get_restripe_target: use lockdep in
 BUG_ON

On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 12:23:01PM -0400, Bobby Powers wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Bobby Powers <bobbypowers@...il.com> wrote:
> > spin_is_locked always returns 0 on non-SMP systems, which causes btrfs
> > to fail the mount.  There is documentation pending as to why checking
> 
> I guess I should be explicit in stating that this is a regression, so
> this patch or something else that addresses it should be pulled into
> 3.4.

Yes, this is a regression and spin_is_locked() definitely has to go.  I
don't have a strong opinion on this assert, if there are objections to
v2 I'm OK with ripping that BUG_ON entirely and replacing it with a
comment (this function and its callers are WIP).

Thanks,

		Ilya
--
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/