linux-kernel - Re: Using nested locking for spin_lock

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1334488687.28150.3.camel@twins>
Date:	Sun, 15 Apr 2012 13:18:07 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Sven Eckelmann <sven@...fation.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	simon.wunderlich@...03.tu-chemnitz.de,
	Marek Lindner <lindner_marek@...oo.de>
Subject: Re: Using nested locking for spin_lock_bh

On Wed, 2012-03-28 at 18:36 +0200, Sven Eckelmann wrote:
> 
> Is there another way how this should be done or is there a general problem why 
> there is no nested support for this incarnation of spin_lock? 

No reason other than that it wasn't needed before now, but I see you've
resolved things with a lockdep_set_class() which works too.


--
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/