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:   Fri, 12 Apr 2019 10:22:20 -0400
From:   Waiman Long <>
To:     Ingo Molnar <>,
        Peter Zijlstra <>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <>, Will Deacon <>,
        Thomas Gleixner <>,,,
        Davidlohr Bueso <>,
        Linus Torvalds <>,
        Tim Chen <>,
        huang ying <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH-tip v3 02/14] locking/rwsem: Make owner available even if

On 04/12/2019 10:07 AM, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 04/12/2019 10:04 AM, Waiman Long wrote:
>> On 04/12/2019 03:09 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>> * Peter Zijlstra <> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 09:02:09AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>>>> * Waiman Long <> wrote:
>>>>>> On 04/11/2019 04:12 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 02:42:19PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>>>>>>>> The owner field in the rw_semaphore structure is used primarily for
>>>>>>>> optimistic spinning. However, identifying the rwsem owner can also be
>>>>>>>> helpful in debugging as well as tracing locking related issues when
>>>>>>>> analyzing crash dump. The owner field may also store state information
>>>>>>>> that can be important to the operation of the rwsem.
>>>>>>>> So the owner field is now made a permanent member of the rw_semaphore
>>>>>>>> structure irrespective of CONFIG_RWSEM_SPIN_ON_OWNER.
>>>>>>> sem->owner is still initialized under CONFIG_RWSEM_SPIN_ON_OWNER.
>>>>>> Oh, you are right. I missed that part. I will fix it in the next version.
>>>>> Could you please post the next series against tip:WIP.locking/core, which 
>>>>> is already being dogfood-ed in -tip and which I'm running on my desktop? 
>>>>> I'll backmerge any fixes as needed/requested.
>>>> Urgh, please no, that's going to be hell to review :/
>>> Ok - full patches then. I'll handle the fallout.
>>> Thanks,
>>> 	Ingo
>> I will post an updated patchset later today.
>> Sorry for the omission.
>> Cheers,
>> Longman
> BTW, the v3 patch that I posted yesterday should work fine as long as
> Cheers,
> Longman
Oh, I see that the WIP.locking/core is currently merged into master. I
would say rwsem part1 patchset and patch 1 of part2 are stable. So I
would suggest merging those into the the master will be good. The rests
are still under review until I get an OK from Peter. If they miss the
next merge window and have to postpone to 5.3, I am fine with that.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists