linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 07/15] locking/lockdep: Free lock classes that are no longer in use

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: <20190110152804.GH30894@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Thu, 10 Jan 2019 16:28:04 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
Cc:     mingo@...hat.com, tj@...nel.org, longman@...hat.com,
        johannes.berg@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 07/15] locking/lockdep: Free lock classes that are no
 longer in use

On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 01:29:54PM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> +static bool inside_selftest(void)
> +{
> +	return current == lockdep_selftest_task_struct;
> +}

> +void lockdep_free_key_range(void *start, unsigned long size)
> +{
> +	init_data_structures_once();
> +
> +	if (inside_selftest())
> +		lockdep_free_key_range_imm(start, size);
> +	else
> +		lockdep_free_key_range_reg(start, size);
>  }

That is .... unfortunate. The whole reason that whole immediate thing
works at all is because there is no concurrency what so ever that early,
right?

Should we maybe key off of: 'system_state == SYSTEM_BOOTING' instead?