linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 01/12] locking/lockdep: Rework lockdep_set_novalidate

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:   Sun, 11 Nov 2018 02:28:23 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kasan-dev@...glegroups.com,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
        Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 01/12] locking/lockdep: Rework
 lockdep_set_novalidate_class()

On Sat, Nov 10, 2018 at 07:26:51PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 11/10/2018 09:14 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 03:34:17PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
> >> The current lockdep_set_novalidate_class() implementation is like
> >> a hack. It assigns a special class key for that lock and calls
> >> lockdep_init_map() twice.
> > Ideally it would go away.. it is not thing that should be used.
> 
> Yes, I agree. Right now, lockdep_set_novalidate_class() is used in
> 
> drivers/base/core.c:    lockdep_set_novalidate_class(&dev->mutex);
> drivers/md/bcache/btree.c:      lockdep_set_novalidate_class(&b->lock);
> drivers/md/bcache/btree.c:     
> lockdep_set_novalidate_class(&b->write_lock);
> 
> Do you know the history behind making them novalidate?

Only of the driver/base/core.c one; there the locking order depends on
the hardware and we never quite found a way to annotate that sanely. I
forgot most details though.

The other stuff I only 'recently' found out about :-( And ideally would
have never made it into the tree, but alas.