linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 13/19] vfs: Add a mount-notification facility [ver #16]

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:   Fri, 21 Feb 2020 16:49:04 +0100
From:   Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
To:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:     Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, raven@...maw.net,
        Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...hat.com>,
        Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
        Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/19] vfs: Add a mount-notification facility [ver #16]

On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 1:24 PM David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> wrote:
> Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> > > + * Post mount notifications to all watches going rootwards along the tree.
> > > + *
> > > + * Must be called with the mount_lock held.
> >
> > Please put such constraints into lockdep assertions instead of
> > comments; that way, violations can actually be detected.
>
> What's the best way to write a lockdep assertion?
>
>         BUG_ON(!lockdep_is_held(lock));

lockdep_assert_held(lock) is the normal way, I think - that will
WARN() if lockdep is enabled and the lock is not held.