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: <20170825043914.GE3858@X58A-UD3R>
Date:   Fri, 25 Aug 2017 13:39:14 +0900
From:   Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     mingo@...nel.org, tj@...nel.org, boqun.feng@...il.com,
        david@...morbit.com, johannes@...solutions.net, oleg@...hat.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] lockdep: Fix workqueue crossrelease annotation

On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 04:02:40PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > +	if (c == XHLOCK_PROC) {

I found this now. Are you trying to invalidate it w/o checking force?
No, we _should not_ do this. It's worse than work-around code.

No reason to do this here. Please communicate with me more or understand
how this code works before applying it.

> > > +		/* verified the former, ensure the latter */
> > > +		WARN_ON_ONCE(!force && cur->lockdep_depth);
> > > +		invalidate_xhlock(&xhlock(cur->xhlock_idx));
> > >  	}

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ