linux-kernel - Re: Fix false positive by LOCKDEP

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: <20171019015705.GD32368@X58A-UD3R>
Date:   Thu, 19 Oct 2017 10:57:06 +0900
From:   Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
To:     Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@....com>
Cc:     "mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>,
        "peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "amir73il@...il.com" <amir73il@...il.com>,
        "linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
        "hch@...radead.org" <hch@...radead.org>,
        "linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "oleg@...hat.com" <oleg@...hat.com>,
        "darrick.wong@...cle.com" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
        "johannes.berg@...el.com" <johannes.berg@...el.com>,
        "linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "idryomov@...il.com" <idryomov@...il.com>,
        "tj@...nel.org" <tj@...nel.org>,
        "kernel-team@....com" <kernel-team@....com>,
        "david@...morbit.com" <david@...morbit.com>
Subject: Re: Fix false positive by LOCKDEP_CROSSRELEASE

On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 02:29:56PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-10-18 at 18:38 +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> > Several false positives were reported, so I tried to fix them.
> > 
> > It would be appreciated if you tell me if it works as expected, or let
> > me know your opinion.
> 
> What I have been wondering about is whether the crosslock checking makes
> sense from a conceptual point of view. I tried to find documentation for the
> crosslock checking in Documentation/locking/lockdep-design.txt but
> couldn't find a description of the crosslock checking. Shouldn't it be
> documented somewhere what the crosslock checks do and what the theory is
> behind these checks?

Documentation/locking/crossrelease.txt would be helpful.