linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] genirq/irqdesc: Balance locking to make sparse happy

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Z_-aSfU6iSyNRQhu@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2025 14:53:45 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] genirq/irqdesc: Balance locking to make sparse
 happy

On Wed, Apr 16, 2025 at 02:52:18PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2025 at 02:40:34PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > Sparse is not happy right now about conditional locking and
> > complains:
> > 
> >   irqdesc.c:899:17: warning: context imbalance in '__irq_get_desc_lock' - wrong count at exit
> > 
> > Refactor the code and use __acquire() to make it happy.
> > Annotate the function that it acquires the lock in the
> > similar way how __irq_put_desc_unlock() is marked.
> 
> Oh, scratch this, it basically will diminish the idea for the users.

That said, the first patch is okay, in case you want it.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko