linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Remove the XFS mrlock

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: <CAGudoHEOTXu_53Cj+6XrS6x=8ouOiiC8bRnerYg39ZjWEoGvNg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 8 Oct 2023 22:31:48 +0200
From:   Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@...il.com>
To:     "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@...radead.org>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, Chandan Babu R <chandan.babu@...cle.com>,
        "Darrick J . Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Remove the XFS mrlock

On 10/7/23, Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
> I'm sympathetic to "this will warn twice and dump much the same
> information if you have lockdep enabled".  Perhaps somebody has a
> suggestion for not doing that?
>

Well the obvious idea is that lockdep could provide a macro indicating
what's up.

Then you would:
static inline void rwsem_assert_held(const struct rw_semaphore *sem)
{
        if (lockdep_works)
               lockdep_assert_held(sem);
        else
               __rwsem_assert_held(sem);
}

Am I missing something? If this is not feasible to achieve, then the
proposed routines need a comment justifying the state.

-- 
Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik gmail.com>