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 17:06:22 +0000
From:   David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To:     Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
Cc:     dhowells@...hat.com, 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]

Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com> wrote:

> > 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.

Okay.  But what's the best way with a seqlock_t?  It has two dep maps in it.
Do I just ignore the one attached to the spinlock?

David

Powered by blists - more mailing lists