linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] iocost: don't nest spin_lock_irq in ioc_weight

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: <5507a74c-35e6-177c-d9b1-91ebc3120ea2@kernel.dk>
Date:   Thu, 31 Oct 2019 11:38:58 -0600
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:     Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iocost: don't nest spin_lock_irq in ioc_weight_write()

On 10/31/19 4:53 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> This code causes a static analysis warning:
> 
>      block/blk-iocost.c:2113 ioc_weight_write() error: double lock 'irq'
> 
> We disable IRQs in blkg_conf_prep() and re-enable them in
> blkg_conf_finish().  IRQ disable/enable should not be nested because
> that means the IRQs will be enabled at the first unlock instead of the
> second one.

Applied for 5.3, thanks.

-- 
Jens Axboe