linux-kernel - Re: [pchecks v2 0/2] percpu v3: Implement Preemption checks for __this

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: <20131004060136.GB11399@gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 4 Oct 2013 08:01:36 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, akpm@...uxfoundation.org,
	Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [pchecks v2 0/2] percpu v3: Implement Preemption checks for
 __this_cpu operations

* Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com> wrote:

> This patchset introduces preemption checks for __this_cpu operations.
> 
> First we add new raw_cpu operations that perform this cpu operations
> without preempt checks. 
> 
> The second patch then adds the preempt checks by modifying the
> __this_cpu macros in include/linux/percpu.h

Patch submission technical feedback: your 0/2 mail is still non-standard, 
it arrived out of order and looks broken - why isn't it threaded to the 
other patches? Here is how it looks like in my mailer:

You should either use "git send-email" to create proper threading (you can 
use that even if you originally created the series via Quilt), or you can 
send them manually with proper threading (that's what I did years ago when 
I still used Quilt).

You should not burden lkml with broken-format submissions, especially as 
the size of this patch series is expected to grow in the future, as you 
fix false positive warnings.

64877   C Oct 03 Christoph Lamet ( 206) ┬─>[pchecks v2 2/2] percpu: Add preemption checks to __this_cpu ops
64878   C Oct 03 Christoph Lamet ( 121) └─>[pchecks v2 1/2] percpu: Add raw_cpu_ops
64879   C Oct 03 Christoph Lamet (  24) [pchecks v2 0/2] percpu v3: Implement Preemption checks for __this_cpu operatio

> V2->V3:
> 	- Subject line in the raw_cpu_ops patch had ; instead of :.
> 	  Guess I am getting old.
> 	- Improve descriptions and variable names.
> 	- Run tests again with kvm to verify that it still works.
> 		A) No warnings with just the patches applied
> 		B) Lots of warnings with CONFIG_DEBUG_THIS_CPU_OPERATIONS enabled

Patch series technical feedback: it's standard kernel debugging 
infrastructure policy that all warnings that trigger with debugging 
enabled need to be fixed, so your series will need to fix them before I 
can move forward with merging these patches.

Please fix these technical shortcomings before your next submission.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/