linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] lockdep: upper limit LOCKDEP_CHAINS

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: <ZrEuz9bjZcBq6jNG@google.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2024 19:58:07 +0000
From: Carlos Llamas <cmllamas@...gle.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...roid.com,
	"J. R. Okajima" <hooanon05g@...il.com>,
	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] lockdep: upper limit LOCKDEP_CHAINS_BITS

On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 04:48:23PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> btw, the help text "Bitsize for MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAINS" is odd.  What's a
> bitsize?  Maybe "bit shift count for..." or such.

Yeah, maybe a _SHIFT suffix would have been better fit for these configs
instead of _BITS. Similar to PAGE_SHIFT or NODES_SHIFT. Anyways, I can
send a patch to improve the help text. How about something like:
   "Size for ... (as a power of 2)"

I'll also send a separate patch to fix the rest of the upper limits. Any
of the (1 << 30) shifts allocates static arrays that blow past the .bss
segment. Just as originally reporeted by J. R. Okajima.

--
Carlos Llamas