linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 03/10] freezer: add new freezable helpers using freezer_do_not

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: <20130503042013.GC16968@mtj.dyndns.org>
Date:	Thu, 2 May 2013 21:20:13 -0700
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Colin Cross <ccross@...roid.com>
Cc:	Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>,
	Mandeep Baines <msb@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/10] freezer: add new freezable helpers using
 freezer_do_not_count()

On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 09:17:21PM -0700, Colin Cross wrote:
> > And I *hope* the lockdep annotation is stricter than what was added
> > before.  I think it better be "no lock ever should be held at this
> > point" rather than "consider this a big lock".
> 
> The previous patch (6aa9707099c4b25700940eb3d016f16c4434360d in Linus'
> tree) already required that no locks be held, it wasn't using a lock
> annotation.

Ooh, cool.  Thanks for the pointer.  Forget about my rambling and
let's just add an unsafe version of try_to_freeze() and be done with
it.  :)

-- 
tejun
--
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/