netdev - Re: [patch 2/4] net: use mutex_is_locked() for ASSERT

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: <20071217075755.GA2128@ff.dom.local>
Date:	Mon, 17 Dec 2007 08:57:55 +0100
From:	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
To:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 2/4] net: use mutex_is_locked() for ASSERT_RTNL()

On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 03:31:33PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 08:26:01AM +0100, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> >
> > Btw. #2: David Miller gave this example of ASSERT_RTNL use:
> > 
> > 	ASSERT_RTNL();
> > 	page = alloc_page(GFP_KERNEL);
> > 
> > But isn't there a debugging duplication: it seems alloc_page() is used
> > in so many places and this check for GFP is/should_be there already?
> 
> On some paths this may be buried a conditional.  Also if you
> replace it with a mutex_is_locked without the may_sleep it won't
> catch the case that started all this, namely the promiscuous path.
> 

Right! There is only a question how much is such cases vs. checked
already, because then a might_sleep is really more readable when
added explicitly.

Jarek P.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html