netdev - Re: [PATCH v3 04/11] net: qrtr: support identical node ids

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: <20250728105142.GZ1367887@horms.kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2025 11:51:42 +0100
From: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To: Mihai Moldovan <ionic@...ic.de>
Cc: linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@...nel.org>,
	Denis Kenzior <denkenz@...il.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...gle.com>,
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
	"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 04/11] net: qrtr: support identical node ids

On Sun, Jul 27, 2025 at 07:33:58PM +0200, Mihai Moldovan wrote:
> * On 7/27/25 16:40, Simon Horman wrote:
> > I tried again with the latest head,
> > commit 2fb2b9093c5d ("sleep_info: The synchronize_srcu() sleeps").
> > And in that case I no longer see the 1st warning, about locking.
> > I think this is what you saw too.
> 
> Exactly! Together with impossible condition warnings, but those are actually
> fine/intended.

Yeah, I saw them too.
I agree they are not correctness issues.

> 
> > This seems to a regression in Smatch wrt this particular case for this
> > code. I bisected Smatch and it looks like it was introduced in commit
> > d0367cd8a993 ("ranges: use absolute instead implied for possibly_true/false")
> Oh, thank you very much. I suspected that I'm just missing a special script
> or option or even addition to Smash (given that Dan seems to have revamped
> its locking check code in 2020), especially since it seems to be so widely
> used in kernel development, but not a bug in the software itself.

Likewise, thanks for pointing out this problem.