linux-kernel - Re: [raw v1 0/4] Replace __this_cpu ops with raw_cpu

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]

Message-ID: <20131008102918.GB22639@gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 8 Oct 2013 12:29:18 +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: [raw v1 0/4] Replace __this_cpu ops with raw_cpu_ops where
 necessary


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

> The kernel can detect __this_cpu ops in preemptible contexts after the 
> preemption check patchset that I posted last week.
> 
> Here is a selection of patches to fix false positives caused by the 
> additional checks. So far I have found no bug. Amazing. Looks like there 
> was some prior work done to shake these things out?

You can probably thank -rt/PREEMPT_RT for such efforts - I think Thomas in 
particular has hit a couple of genuine bugs with __this_cpu APIs the hard 
way and then fixed them.

This series, once finished, will allow us to detect such problems cheaper 
and earlier.

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/