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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170822092141.fjmr74xhfid7vu7h@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Tue, 22 Aug 2017 11:21:41 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
Cc:     mingo@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-team@....com, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        johannes@...solutions.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] lockdep: Make LOCKDEP_CROSSRELEASE configs all
 part of PROVE_LOCKING

On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 05:51:00PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 09:52:38AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > That wouldn't work. That annotation is to help find deadlocks like:
> > 
> > 
> > 	mutex_lock(&A)
> > 				<work>
> > 				mutex_lock(&A)
> > 
> > 	flush_work(&work)
> > 
> 
> I meant:
> 
>  	mutex_lock(&A)
>  				<work>
>  				lockdep_map_acquire_read(&work)
>  				mutex_lock(&A)
> 
>  	lockdep_map_acquire(&work)
>  	flush_work(&work)
> 
> I mean it can still be detected with a read acquisition in work.
> Am I wrong?

Think so, although there's something weird with read locks that I keep
forgetting. But I'm not sure it'll actually solve the problem. But I can
try I suppose.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ