linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] locking/lockdep: Add support for dynamic depmaps and keys

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]

Date:   Sat, 10 Nov 2018 14:55:24 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
Cc:     mingo@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] locking/lockdep: Add support for dynamic depmaps and
 keys

On Fri, Nov 09, 2018 at 03:46:44PM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> The lock validator forces to categorize multiple instances of a lock object
> as the same lock class because it requires that struct lockdep_map and struct
> lock_class_key instances are static objects. This can result in false
> positive lockdep reports that are hard to suppress in an elegant way. Hence
> add support for allocating instances of these objects dynamically.

Yeah, I think not. You completely fail to explain how what you propose
is correct.

The thing is; we rely on static objects because they provide
persistence. Their address will never be re-used.

Dynamic objects do not provide this same guarantee. And when you re-use
the key address for something else, you'll mix the chains and things
come unstuck.