linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: lustre/ldlm: Fixed sparse warnings

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]

Message-ID: <20160912102747.GA13621@kroah.com>
Date:   Mon, 12 Sep 2016 12:27:47 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Nayeemahmed Badebade <itachi.opsrc@...il.com>
Cc:     oleg.drokin@...el.com, andreas.dilger@...el.com,
        jsimmons@...radead.org, Keith.Mannthey@...el.com,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        bruce.korb@...il.com, lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: lustre/ldlm: Fixed sparse warnings

On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 08:50:35PM +0530, Nayeemahmed Badebade wrote:
> Added __acquires / __releases sparse locking annotations
> to lock_res_and_lock and unlock_res_and_lock functions in
> l_lock.c, to fix below sparse warnings:
> 
>  l_lock.c:47:22: warning: context imbalance in 'lock_res_and_lock' - wrong count at exit
>  l_lock.c:62:6: warning: context imbalance in 'unlock_res_and_lock' - unexpected unlock
> 
> Signed-off-by: Nayeemahmed Badebade <itachi.opsrc@...il.com>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/l_lock.c | 4 ++++
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/l_lock.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/l_lock.c
> index ea8840c..c4b9612 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/l_lock.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/l_lock.c
> @@ -45,6 +45,8 @@
>   * being an atomic operation.
>   */
>  struct ldlm_resource *lock_res_and_lock(struct ldlm_lock *lock)
> +				__acquires(&lock->l_lock)
> +				__acquires(lock->l_resource)

Hm, these are tricky, I don't want to take this type of change without
an ack from the lustre developers...

thanks,

greg k-h