linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree

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]

Date:	Wed, 16 Oct 2013 22:52:07 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>
Cc:	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
	Shaohua Li <shli@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree

Hey Neil;

it looks like its one of your patches isn't it?

http://www.spinics.net/lists/raid/msg44100.html
http://www.spinics.net/lists/raid/msg44101.html

Given that I can't find them in a lkml archive means nobody's ever seen
those patches.

Anyway; has that 3/3 patch ever been ran with lockdep enabled? 

Stuff like:

+	for (i = 0; i < NR_STRIPE_HASH_LOCKS; i++)
+		spin_lock_init(conf->hash_locks + i);

And:

+static void __lock_all_hash_locks(struct r5conf *conf)
+{
+	int i;
+	for (i = 0; i < NR_STRIPE_HASH_LOCKS; i++)
+		spin_lock(conf->hash_locks + i);
+}

Tends to complain real loud.

This leaves one to wonder... 
  'fancy' locking scheme:1, validation effort:0


--
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/