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: <20170831083453.5tfjofzk7idthsof@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Thu, 31 Aug 2017 10:34:53 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
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 31, 2017 at 05:15:01PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> It's not important. Ok, check the following, instead:
> 
> context X                 context Y
> ---------                 ---------
>                           wait_for_completion(C)
> acquire(A)
> release(A)
> process_one_work()
>    acquire(B)
>    release(B)
>    work->fn()
>       complete(C)
> 
> We don't need to lose C->A and C->B dependencies unnecessarily.

I really can't be arsed about them. Its really only the first few works
that will retain that dependency anyway, even if you were to retain
them.

All of that is contained in kernel/kthread and kernel/workqueue and can
be audited if needed. Its a very limited amount of code.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ