| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20140918204455.GA26995@thunk.org> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 16:44:55 -0400 From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu> To: Fabian Frederick <fabf@...net.be> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1 linux-next] jbd2: Fix sparse context imbalance warning On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 08:29:34PM +0200, Fabian Frederick wrote: > spin_unlock after spin_lock only. > > This fixes the following sparse warning: > fs/jbd2/transaction.c:1102:20: warning: context imbalance > in 'jbd2_journal_get_create_access' - different lock contexts for basic block > > Signed-off-by: Fabian Frederick <fabf@...net.be> NAK, this is a case where I think it's better to make the static analyzers better. In any case sparse gives a lot of false positives for this particular warning, so adding lines of code to try to shut up sparse for every single false positive seems to be a losing proposition. I'll note that these sorts of bugs are much more easily picked up using lockdep in any case, so we're probably better of just ignoring these sorts of warnings. Better to let the 0day kernel tester warn for new sparse warnings, instead of trying to drive sparse warnings down to zero. Cheers, - Ted -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists