linux-kernel - Re: (subset) [PATCH 0/5] regmap: Improve lock handling with maple tree

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: <172445383117.842265.10956767948362419603.b4-ty@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2024 23:57:11 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>, 
 Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Cristian Ciocaltea <cristian.ciocaltea@...labora.com>, 
 maple-tree@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, 
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: (subset) [PATCH 0/5] regmap: Improve lock handling with maple
 tree

On Thu, 22 Aug 2024 20:13:34 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> The lockdep asserts in the maple tree code and the double locking that
> we're doing continue to cause issues, most recently some warnings
> reported by Cristian Ciocaltea due to dynamic cache allocations in
> interrupt context (which are an issue in themselves, but still).  Let's
> start trying to improve the situation by configuring the regmap lock as
> an external lock for maple tree, allowing it to do it's asserts without
> having a separate lock.
> 
> [...]

Applied to

   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/regmap.git for-next

Thanks!

[2/5] regmap: Hold the regmap lock when allocating and freeing the cache
      commit: fd4ebc07b4dff7e1abedf1b7fd477bc04b69ae55
[3/5] regmap: Use locking during kunit tests
      commit: 290d6e5d6498703accffc66849b7fb2d4d7503ff

All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next
tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during
the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if
problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.

You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing
and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and
send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.

If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they
should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing
patches will not be replaced.

Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying
to this mail.

Thanks,
Mark