| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 16:06:59 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com> Cc: Bill Huey <billh@...ppy.monkey.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, John Stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ibm.com>, Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] move put_task_struct() reaping into a thread [Re: 2.6.18-rt1] * Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com> wrote: > I'm still wondering if we can move put_task_struct a little lower in > the logic in the places where it is called, so it isn't called under a > lock, or with preemption disabled. The only downside I see is that it > might convolute the logic into unreadability. well it's all a function of the task reaping logic: right now we in essence complete the reaping from the scheduler, via prev_state == TASK_DEAD. We cannot do it sooner because the task is still in use. I had one other implementation upstream some time ago, which was a single-slot cache for reaped tasks - but that uglified other codepaths because _something_ has to notice that the task has been unscheduled. Ingo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists