linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] lock/lockdep: Add missing graph_unlock in validate

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: <ZZwivt2C7-oxuMJS@boqun-archlinux>
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2024 08:28:46 -0800
From: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
To: Xuewen Yan <xuewen.yan94@...il.com>
Cc: Xuewen Yan <xuewen.yan@...soc.com>, peterz@...radead.org,
	mingo@...hat.com, will@...nel.org, longman@...hat.com,
	ke.wang@...soc.com, zhiguo.niu@...soc.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lock/lockdep: Add missing graph_unlock in validate_chain

On Fri, Jan 05, 2024 at 12:46:36PM +0800, Xuewen Yan wrote:
[...]
> >
> > Are you hitting a real issue or this is found by code reading?
> 
> Indeed, we hit a real issue:
> One cpu did not call graph_unlock, as a result, caused a deadlock with
> other cpus,
> because any cpu calling raw_spin_lock would get the graph_lock first.
> 

Could you share more details about the real issue you hit? For example,
serial log? I asked because although the graph_unlock() makes logical
sense, but that path should really not hit if lockdep works correctly.
Thanks!

Regards,
Boqun

> Thanks!