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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Wed, 25 Oct 2017 07:55:27 +0200
From:   Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:     Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
Cc:     peterz@...radead.org, axboe@...nel.dk, tglx@...utronix.de,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, tj@...nel.org,
        johannes.berg@...el.com, oleg@...hat.com, amir73il@...il.com,
        david@...morbit.com, darrick.wong@...cle.com,
        linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, hch@...radead.org, idryomov@...il.com,
        kernel-team@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 8/8] block: Assign a lock_class per gendisk used for
 wait_for_completion()


* Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com> wrote:

> > Isn't lockdep_map a zero size structure that is always defined? If yes then 
> > there's no need for an #ifdef.
> 
> No, a zero size structure for lockdep_map is not provided yet.
> There are two options I can do:
> 
> 1. Add a zero size structure for lockdep_map and remove #ifdef
> 2. Replace CONFIG_LOCKDEP_COMPLETIONS with CONFIG_LOCKDEP here.
> 
> Or something else?
> 
> Which one do you prefer?

Ok, could we try #1 in a new patch and re-spin the simplified block layer patch on 
top of that?

The less ugly a debug facility's impact on unrelated kernel is, the better - 
especially when it comes to annotating false positives.

Thanks,

	Ingo

Powered by blists - more mailing lists