linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] rtmutex: take the waiter lock with irqs off

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:	Fri, 22 Nov 2013 17:21:02 +0100
From:	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@...ine.de>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	RT <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] rtmutex: take the waiter lock with irqs off

On 11/22/2013 05:08 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 02:59:31PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>> +extern void __lockfunc rt_spin_try_unlock(spinlock_t *lock);
> 
> I know what you mean, but.. try_unlock() just sounds wrong, how can we
> attempt but fail to unlock a lock we hold ;-)

what about
- rt_spin_unlock_try_or_fail();
- __rt_spin_unlock_dont_use_me()

Couldn't we tell lockdep to bend the rules in this case?

> 
> 
> /me crawls back under his rock ;-)
:)

Sebastian
--
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/