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:   Mon, 12 Nov 2018 19:42:16 +0900
From:   Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>
To:     Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc:     Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
        Dmitriy Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
        Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/3] printk: Add line-buffered printk() API.

On 2018/11/12 16:59, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> Tetsuo, lockdep report with buffered printks looks a bit different:
> 
>  kernel:  Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>  kernel:        CPU0                    CPU1
>  kernel:        ----                    ----
>  kernel:   lock(bar_lock);
>  kernel:                                lock(
>  kernel: foo_lock);
>  kernel:                                lock(bar_lock);
>  kernel:   lock(foo_lock);
>  kernel: 
> 

Yes. That is because vprintk_buffered() eliminated KERN_CONT.
Since there was pending partial printk() output, vprintk_buffered()
should not eliminate KERN_CONT. Petr Mladek commented

  1. The mixing of normal and buffered printk calls is a bit confusing
     and error prone. It would make sense to use the buffered printk
     everywhere in the given section of code even when it is not
     strictly needed.

and I made a draft version for how the code would look like if we try to
avoid the mixing of normal and buffered printk calls. The required changes
seem to be too large to apply tree wide. And I suggested try_buffered_printk().

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ