linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] lockdep: lock_set_lock_cmp

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:   Thu, 23 Feb 2023 14:27:06 -0500
From:   Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com,
        stern@...land.harvard.edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] lockdep: lock_set_lock_cmp_fn()

On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 02:01:58PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> I would suggest the same as last time; integrate this in the class
> setting zoo of functions.

I don't really see a particular zoo, things like pretty scattered to me.
With lockdep_init_map_type?

> If you insiste, please keep it one function
> and force print_fn when cmp_fn. We don't want people to skimp out on
> this.

That's easily done.

> 
> Other than that, I don't think this can fully replace subclasses, since
> subclasses would allow lock hierarchies with other classes inter-twined,
> while this really relies on pure class nesting.
> 
> That is:
> 
> 	A/0
> 	B
> 	A/1
> 
> is a valid subclass nesting set, but you can't achieve the same with
> this.

Why not just assign those As to two different classes?

> That said; it does seem like a very useful additional annotation for the
> more complex nesting sets.
> 
> Thanks!

Cheers