linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] lglock: update lockdep annotations to report recursive local locks

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: <20130305174204.GB5012@redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 5 Mar 2013 18:42:04 +0100
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
	"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	rostedt@...dmis.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] lglock: update lockdep annotations to report
	recursive local locks

On 03/04, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
>
> Both issues are easily fixed by indicating to lockdep that lglock's local
> locks are not recursive. We shouldn't use the rwlock acquire/release
> functions here, as lglock doesn't share the same semantics. Instead
> we can base our lockdep annotations on the lock_acquire_shared
> (for local lglock) and lock_acquire_exclusive (for global lglock)
> helpers.

IOW, with this patch lglock looks like rw_semaphore for lockdep...

Again, I can't ack this change, but afaics it is fine.

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/