linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] locking/lockdep: Enforce PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING only if ARCH_SUPPORTS

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: <20241127164442.catRG_Aw@linutronix.de>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2024 17:44:42 +0100
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] locking/lockdep: Enforce PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING only if
 ARCH_SUPPORTS_RT

On 2024-11-26 18:11:54 [-0500], Waiman Long wrote:
> Relax the rule to set PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING by default only for arches
> that supports PREEMPT_RT.  For arches that do not support PREEMPT_RT,
> they will not be forced to address irrelevant raw lock nesting issues
> when they want to enable PROVE_LOCKING.

I don't like the wording here. It is not "irrelevant raw lock nesting
issues". This is documented in Documentation/locking/locktypes.rst.
*IFF* we agree to ignore those because we don't want PREEMPT_RT on
certain architectures then okay. But please don't describe it as
irrelevant.

Sebastian