netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 01/13] tcp: factor out tcp_build

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: <20201114130239.006cf4c5@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date:   Sat, 14 Nov 2020 13:02:39 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        mptcp@...ts.01.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 01/13] tcp: factor out tcp_build_frag()

On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 11:38:13 +0100 Paolo Abeni wrote:
> > Is there a chance someone could look into adding annotations to socket
> > locking?  
> 
> Annotating lock_sock_fast()/unlock_sock_fast() as they would
> unconditionally acquire/release the socket spinlock removes the warning
> related to fast lock - at least for me;).
> 
> Hopefully that does not interact with lockdep, but perhpas is a bit too
> extreme/rusty?

I'm not a sparse expert, do we need both __acquire and __acquires?

Would you mind submitting officially and CCing the sparse ML?