Re: [PATCH 2/2] lockdep: choose to continue lock debugging despitetaint

[Ingo Molnar]

* Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 02:15:15PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > * Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > > Lockdep is disabled after any kernel taints. This might be 
> > > convenient to ignore bad locking issues which sources come from 
> > > outside the kernel tree. Nevertheless, it might be a frustrating 
> > > experience for the staging developers or anyone who might develop 
> > > a kernel that happens to be tainted.
> > 
> > Good point. Not having lockdep coverage for drivers/staging/ just 
> > prolongs their transition - not good.
> > 
> > But instead of this:
> > 
> > >  void add_taint(unsigned flag)
> > >  {
> > > +#ifndef CONFIG_LOCKDEP_IGNORE_TAINT
> > >  	/*
> > >  	 * Can't trust the integrity of the kernel anymore.
> > >  	 * We don't call directly debug_locks_off() because the issue
> > > @@ -220,6 +221,7 @@ void add_taint(unsigned flag)
> > >  	 */
> > >  	if (xchg(&debug_locks, 0))
> > >  		printk(KERN_WARNING "Disabling lockdep due to kernel taint\n");
> > > +#endif
> > 
> > I'd suggest to not do the debug_locks_off() call if TAINT_CRAP. I.e. 
> > something like:
> > 
> > 	if (!(flag & TAINT_CRAP) && debug_locks_off())
> > 		printk(...);
> > 
> > will do the trick.
> > 
> > 	Ingo
> 
> 
> Ok, but this is not only about staging. It's also about 
> TAINT_WARN. Just imagine that you report a warning to a 
> maintainer, and while you are waiting for it to be fixed, you 
> can't use lockdep for your own needs.
> 
> Hm?

We can exclude TAINT_WARN too - i.e. (TAINT_CRAP|TAINT_WARN).

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/