linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] thinkpad_acpi: moved hotkey_thread_mutex lock after set

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]

Date:	Tue, 26 Feb 2013 09:47:38 +0400
From:	Artem Savkov <artem.savkov@...il.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	ibm-acpi-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, ibm-acpi@....eng.br,
	matthew.garrett@...ula.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] thinkpad_acpi: moved hotkey_thread_mutex lock after
 set_freezable()

On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 03:54:45PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 13:22:02 +0400
> Artem Savkov <artem.savkov@...il.com> wrote:
> 
> > set_freezable() checks freezing during which no locks should be held.
> > hotkey_thread_mutex lock should be moved closer to where it is actually needed.
> > 
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> When fixing a bug, we always like to see a full description of that bug
> so we can better work out which kernel versions need the fix.
Sorry, will do thah in future.

> Did you actually hit a lockup because of this?  Or was it just from
> code inspection?  Or ...  ?
I didn't hit an actual lockup, but I did hit a warning during boot. The
warning was added by "lockdep: check that no locks held at freeze time"
patch (2f2ff7b8979c50491b3cbce622d7bea4d44a8682 in linux-next.git)


-- 
Kind regards,
Artem
--
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/