linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/3] Freezer: Fix vfork problem

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]

Date:	Tue, 27 Feb 2007 11:37:41 +0300
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
To:	Aneesh Kumar <aneesh.kumar@...il.com>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ibm.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/3] Freezer: Fix vfork problem

On 02/27, Aneesh Kumar wrote:
>
> >+static inline void freezer_do_not_count(void)
> >+{
> >+       current->flags |= PF_FREEZER_SKIP;
> >+}
> >+
> >+/*
> >+ * Tell the freezer to count this task as freezeable again and if it's a 
> >user
> >+ * space one, try to freeze it
> >+ */
> >+static inline void freezer_count(void)
> >+{
> >+       current->flags &= ~PF_FREEZER_SKIP;
> >+       if (current->mm)
> >+               try_to_freeze();
> >+}
> >+
> 
> 
> This means that we are not going to wait for the kernel thread
> (Parent) to freeze. I guess what vatsa suggested in previous mail is
> better.

Not only better, but correct. This is very simple: if we set PF_FREEZER_SKIP,
we must call try_to_freeze(), otherwise we confuse the freezer.

Oleg.

-
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/