linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] panic: Add panic_in

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 28 Jan 2022 09:24:29 +0100
From:   Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
To:     Stephen Brennan <stephen.s.brennan@...cle.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
        John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] panic: Add panic_in_progress helper

On Thu 2022-01-27 08:02:19, Stephen Brennan wrote:
> On 1/27/22 06:34, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > On Wed 2022-01-26 15:02:33, Stephen Brennan wrote:
> > > This helper will be used in printk code to avoid deadlocks during
> > > panic().
> > > 
> > > Suggested-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Brennan <stephen.s.brennan@...cle.com>
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
> > 
> > Best Regards,
> > Petr
> 
> Hi Petr,
> 
> Thanks for the review, however over the night I received two kernel test
> robot emails. One indicating a new build error caused by this change on m68k
> arch, and the other adding a new warning on riscv. From what I can tell, the
> issues are circular dependencies in #includes. So it may be better to either
> return to the macro, or move this static inline down to
> kernel/printk/printk.c. I think moving it into kernel/printk/printk.c makes
> most sense given that the macro requires the correct #includes anyway.

Yes, I prefer moving the inline down to printk.c. It looks a bit
cleaner than the macro that would not work without another include.

Please, explain this in the commit message.

Best Regards,
Petr