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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <545BD720.6050008@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2014 12:16:32 -0800 From: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com> To: Anish Bhatt <anish@...lsio.com> CC: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>, "john.r.fastabend@...el.com" <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>, "ying.xue@...driver.com" <ying.xue@...driver.com>, "jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>, "ebiederm@...ssion.com" <ebiederm@...ssion.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH net] dcbnl : Fix lock initialization On 11/06/2014 11:12 AM, Anish Bhatt wrote: > Yes, without this kernel is complaining about inconsitent lock state > when lock debugging is enabled. Unfortunately I do not have the trace > lying around right now. > If you have the trace that might help. I can't recall seeing any splats in these code paths. Also as far as I can tell you shouldn't need to do an init after the define. There are lots of examples in ./net/core where this is done. So we need to sort out why the init resolves the issue. > If you wish, you can reject this patch, I'll resend it when I get the trace again, with trace included. > -Anish > ________________________________________ > From: John Fastabend [john.fastabend@...il.com] > Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2014 11:03 AM > To: Anish Bhatt > Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org; davem@...emloft.net; john.r.fastabend@...el.com; ying.xue@...driver.com; jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com; ebiederm@...ssion.com > Subject: Re: [PATCH net] dcbnl : Fix lock initialization > > On 11/06/2014 10:09 AM, Anish Bhatt wrote: >> dcb_lock was being used uninitialized in dcbnl and is infact missing >> initialization code. Fixed >> > > Are you trying to resolve a bug? It is initialized with > > static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(dcb_lock); > > and if you follow the code far enough you get to this in > spinlock_types.h: > > > #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK > # define SPIN_DEBUG_INIT(lockname) \ > .magic = SPINLOCK_MAGIC, \ > .owner_cpu = -1, \ > .owner = SPINLOCK_OWNER_INIT, > #else > # define SPIN_DEBUG_INIT(lockname) > #endif > > #define __RAW_SPIN_LOCK_INITIALIZER(lockname) \ > { \ > .raw_lock = __ARCH_SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED, \ > SPIN_DEBUG_INIT(lockname) \ > SPIN_DEP_MAP_INIT(lockname) } > > [...] > > > > -- > John Fastabend Intel Corporation > -- John Fastabend Intel Corporation -- 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists