linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -mm -next] ipc,sem: fix lockdep false positive

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: <5150C71A.3030802@oracle.com>
Date:	Mon, 25 Mar 2013 17:52:26 -0400
From:	Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>
To:	Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>
CC:	Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	davidlohr.bueso@...com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, hhuang@...hat.com, jason.low2@...com,
	lwoodman@...hat.com, chegu_vinod@...com,
	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>, benisty.e@...il.com,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm -next] ipc,sem: fix lockdep false positive

On 03/25/2013 05:42 PM, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 1:38 PM, Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 16:21:22 -0400
>> > Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com> wrote:
>> >
>>> >> On 03/20/2013 03:55 PM, Rik van Riel wrote:
>>>> >> > Include lkml in the CC: this time... *sigh*
>>>> >> > ---8<---
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > This series makes the sysv semaphore code more scalable,
>>>> >> > by reducing the time the semaphore lock is held, and making
>>>> >> > the locking more scalable for semaphore arrays with multiple
>>>> >> > semaphores.
>>> >>
>>> >> Hi Rik,
>>> >>
>>> >> I'm getting the following false positives from lockdep:
>> >
>> > Does this patch fix it?
> I'll be surprised if it does, because we don't actually have single
> depth nesting here...
> Adding Peter & Ingo for advice about how to proceed
> (the one solution I know would involve using arch_spin_lock() directly
> to bypass the lockdep checks, but there's got to be a better way...)

Yeah, it did not.


Thanks,
Sasha

--
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/