linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 00/33] Compile-time thread-safety checking

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: <CANpmjNPoFMacBc8YhsN0hcw_npCbfixQq44JkXPFdb0uPaNUVA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2025 10:41:47 +0100
From: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, 
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>, 
	Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>, Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 00/33] Compile-time thread-safety checking

On Fri, 7 Feb 2025 at 10:08, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 07, 2025 at 10:05:47AM +0100, Marco Elver wrote:
>
> > Yes, you can add multiple guarded_by. But it's just going to enforce
> > that you need to hold both locks before you access the member. If you
> > want the rules to be more complex, the best way to express that is with
> > some helpers. E.g. something like this (tested on top my series)
>
> Oh gawd, this is going to be a pain, isn't it :/

For complex locking patterns, yes. :-/

Which is why I'm proposing it to be opt-in but relatively complete
(most primitives supported), so that either we have time to work out
how to deal with more complex patterns, or just leave some things
opted-out.