[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170518000231.16163-2-alexander.levin@verizon.com>
Date: Thu, 18 May 2017 00:01:44 +0000
From: alexander.levin@...izon.com
To: "mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>
CC: "ben@...adent.org.uk" <ben@...adent.org.uk>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 02/15] liblockdep: Reduce MAX_LOCK_DEPTH to avoid overflowing
lock_chain::depth
From: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
liblockdep has been broken since commit 75dd602a5198 ("lockdep: Fix
lock_chain::base size"), as that adds a check that MAX_LOCK_DEPTH is
within the range of lock_chain::depth and in liblockdep it is much
too large.
That should have resulted in a compiler error, but didn't because:
- the check uses ARRAY_SIZE(), which isn't yet defined in liblockdep
so is assumed to be an (undeclared) function
- putting a function call inside a BUILD_BUG_ON() expression quietly
turns it into some nonsense involving a variable-length array
It did produce a compiler warning, but I didn't notice because
liblockdep already produces too many warnings if -Wall is enabled
(which I'll fix shortly).
Even before that commit, which reduced lock_chain::depth from 8 bits
to 6, MAX_LOCK_DEPTH was too large.
Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org> # for versions before 4.6, use a value of 255
Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>
---
tools/lib/lockdep/uinclude/linux/lockdep.h | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tools/lib/lockdep/uinclude/linux/lockdep.h b/tools/lib/lockdep/uinclude/linux/lockdep.h
index c808c7d02d21..d30214221920 100644
--- a/tools/lib/lockdep/uinclude/linux/lockdep.h
+++ b/tools/lib/lockdep/uinclude/linux/lockdep.h
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@
#include <linux/utsname.h>
#include <linux/compiler.h>
-#define MAX_LOCK_DEPTH 2000UL
+#define MAX_LOCK_DEPTH 63UL
#define asmlinkage
#define __visible
--
2.11.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists