linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH tip/locking/core] compiler-context-analysis: Support immediate acquisition after initialization

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: <6757ee97-6eaf-45d1-8dcf-327932cb8192@acm.org>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2026 10:04:34 -0800
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
 Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
 Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, llvm@...ts.linux.dev,
 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/locking/core] compiler-context-analysis: Support
 immediate acquisition after initialization

On 1/15/26 10:58 AM, Marco Elver wrote:
> A corollary of this would be "If tooling can't handle a simple pattern
> of initializing a lock and guarded members, that's a hard show
> stopper".

That's your opinion. I'm not sure anyone else shares this opinion.

If an __assume_ctx_lock() annotation is missing from initialization
code, that will result in a clear and easy to fix error message.

Silently ignoring two classes of real bugs is a much worse choice in my
opinion than requesting __guarded_by() users to add an
__assume_ctx_lock() annotation in initialization code.

Bart.