linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] lockdep: check that no locks held at freeze time

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: <CACBanvrqe2jK1QBSUhbeX5qnz_Weg5iSCtG=B12ZoZNMtigWUw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 20 Feb 2013 15:11:35 -0800
From:	Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@...omium.org>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] lockdep: check that no locks held at freeze time

On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 2:30 PM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:
> On 02/19, Mandeep Singh Baines wrote:
>>
>> We shouldn't try_to_freeze if locks are held. Verified that
>> I get no lockdep warnings after applying this patch and
>> "vfork: don't freezer_count() for in-kernel users of CLONE_VFORK".
>
> I believe the patch is fine.
>
> But I don't understand the changelog, unless I am totally confused
> (and I have a lot of unread emails so perhaps I missed something),
> this version do not need the changes in CLONE_VFORK.
>

Thanks for catching that. The changelog is stale. I'll resend with a
new changelog that omits that sentence.

> And, Mandeep, I'll try to answer your emails asap...
>
> Oleg.
>
--
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/