Re: [PATCH v4 00/24] DEPT(Dependency Tracker)

2022-03-11 Thread Hyeonggon Yoo
On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 04:06:19PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > Hi Linus and folks, > > I've been developing a tool for detecting deadlock possibilities by > tracking wait/event rather than lock(?) acquisition order to try to > cover all synchonization machanisms. It's done on v5.17-rc1 tag. >

Re: [PATCH v4 00/24] DEPT(Dependency Tracker)

2022-03-16 Thread Hyeonggon Yoo
On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 01:32:13PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > On Sat, Mar 12, 2022 at 01:53:26AM +0000, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 04:06:19PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > > > Hi Linus and folks, > > > > > > I've been deve

Re: [PATCH v4 00/24] DEPT(Dependency Tracker)

2022-03-15 Thread Hyeonggon Yoo
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 03:59:06PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > On Sat, Mar 12, 2022 at 01:53:26AM +0000, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 04:06:19PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > > > Hi Linus and folks, > > > > > > I've been deve

Re: [PATCH v3 00/21] DEPT(Dependency Tracker)

2022-03-02 Thread Hyeonggon Yoo
On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 06:56:39PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > I didn't want to bother you so I was planning to send the next spin > after making more progress. However, PATCH v2 reports too many false > positives because Dept tracked the bit_wait_table[] wrong way - I > apologize for that. So

Re: [PATCH v3 00/21] DEPT(Dependency Tracker)

2022-03-02 Thread Hyeonggon Yoo
On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 04:36:38AM +, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote: > On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 06:56:39PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > > I didn't want to bother you so I was planning to send the next spin > > after making more progress. However, PATCH v2 reports too many false > &

Re: [PATCH v3 00/21] DEPT(Dependency Tracker)

2022-03-03 Thread Hyeonggon Yoo
On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 09:18:13AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 04:53:41AM +0000, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 04:36:38AM +, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 06:56:39PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > > >

Re: [PATCH v3 00/21] DEPT(Dependency Tracker)

2022-03-03 Thread Hyeonggon Yoo
On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 06:48:24PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 08:03:21AM +0000, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 09:18:13AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > > > Hi Hyeonggon, > > > > > > Dept also allows the follow

Re: [PATCH v4 22/24] dept: Don't create dependencies between different depths in any case

2022-03-04 Thread Hyeonggon Yoo
add_dep(eh->ecxt, w); > + add_dep(eh->ecxt, w); > } > > if (!wait_consumed(w) && !rich_stack) { > -- > 1.9.1 > > Works as expected, Thanks! I would report if there is anything else interesting. Tested-by: Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hye...@gmail.com> -- Thank you, You are awesome! Hyeonggon :-)

Re: [PATCH RFC v6 07/21] dept: Apply Dept to seqlock

2022-05-20 Thread Hyeonggon Yoo
Hello I got new report from dept, related to seqlock. I applied dept 1.20 series on v5.18-rc7. Below is what DEPT reported. I think this is bogus because reader of p->alloc_lock cannot block its writer. Or please kindly tell me if I'm missing something ;) Thanks. [8.032674]

Re: [PATCH RFC v6 02/21] dept: Implement Dept(Dependency Tracker)

2022-05-20 Thread Hyeonggon Yoo
On Wed, May 04, 2022 at 05:17:30PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > CURRENT STATUS > +/* [...] > + * Ensure it has been called on ON/OFF transition. > + */ > +void dept_enirq_transition(unsigned long ip) > +{ > + struct dept_task *dt = dept_task(); > + unsigned long flags; > + > + if

Re: [PATCH RFC v6 00/21] DEPT(Dependency Tracker)

2022-05-07 Thread Hyeonggon Yoo
On Fri, May 06, 2022 at 09:11:35AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > Linus wrote: > > > > On Wed, May 4, 2022 at 1:19 AM Byungchul Park > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi Linus and folks, > > > > > > I've been developing a tool for detecting deadlock possibilities by > > > tracking wait/event rather than

Re: [PATCH RFC v6 00/21] DEPT(Dependency Tracker)

2022-05-10 Thread Hyeonggon Yoo
On Mon, May 09, 2022 at 09:16:37AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > On Sat, May 07, 2022 at 04:20:50PM +0900, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote: > > On Fri, May 06, 2022 at 09:11:35AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > > > Linus wrote: > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 4, 2022

Re: [PATCH RFC v6 00/21] DEPT(Dependency Tracker)

2022-05-11 Thread Hyeonggon Yoo
On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 08:39:29AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 08:18:12PM +0900, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote: > > On Mon, May 09, 2022 at 09:16:37AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > > > On Sat, May 07, 2022 at 04:20:50PM +0900, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote: > >

Re: [PATCH 01/12] slab: Introduce kmalloc_size_roundup()

2022-09-22 Thread Hyeonggon Yoo
On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 08:10:02PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > In the effort to help the compiler reason about buffer sizes, the > __alloc_size attribute was added to allocators. This improves the scope > of the compiler's ability to apply CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS and (in the near > future)

Re: [PATCH v2 01/16] slab: Remove __malloc attribute from realloc functions

2022-10-01 Thread Hyeonggon Yoo
t; Cc: Andrew Morton > Cc: Vlastimil Babka > Cc: Roman Gushchin > Cc: Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hye...@gmail.com> > Cc: Marco Elver > Cc: linux...@kvack.org > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook > --- > include/linux/compiler_types.h | 13 + > include/linux/slab.h

Re: [PATCH v2 02/16] slab: Introduce kmalloc_size_roundup()

2022-10-01 Thread Hyeonggon Yoo
On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 01:28:08PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > In the effort to help the compiler reason about buffer sizes, the > __alloc_size attribute was added to allocators. This improves the scope > of the compiler's ability to apply CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS and (in the near > future)