linux-kernel - Re: Question on mutex code

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]

Date:	Mon, 16 Mar 2015 05:40:15 +0200
From:	Matthias Bonne <lemonlime51@...il.com>
To:	Rabin Vincent <rabin@....in>
CC:	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
	Yann Droneaud <ydroneaud@...eya.com>,
	kernelnewbies@...nelnewbies.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: Question on mutex code

On 03/16/15 00:10, Rabin Vincent wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 11:49:07PM +0200, Matthias Bonne wrote:
>> So the counter is set to 1 before taking the spinlock, which I think
>> might cause the race. Did I miss something?
>
> Yes, you miss the fact that __mutex_slowpath_needs_to_unlock() is 0 for
> the CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES case:
>
>   #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES
>   # include "mutex-debug.h"
>   # include <asm-generic/mutex-null.h>
>   /*
>    * Must be 0 for the debug case so we do not do the unlock outside of the
>    * wait_lock region. debug_mutex_unlock() will do the actual unlock in this
>    * case.
>    */
>   # undef __mutex_slowpath_needs_to_unlock
>   # define  __mutex_slowpath_needs_to_unlock()	0
>

Right, I overlooked this part. Thanks to both of you for the
clarifications.
--
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/