linux-kernel - Re: [BUG] cpu-hotplug: Can't offline the CPU with naughty realtime processes

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 7 May 2007 19:56:48 +0900
From:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Satoru Takeuchi <takeuchi_satoru@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
	vatsa@...ibm.com, zwane@....linux.org.uk, nathanl@...tin.ibm.com,
	jschopp@...tin.ibm.com, ashok.raj@...el.com,
	heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, takeuchi_satoru@...fujitsu.com
Subject: Re: [BUG] cpu-hotplug: Can't offline the CPU with naughty realtime
 processes

On Mon, 07 May 2007 19:10:05 +0900
Satoru Takeuchi <takeuchi_satoru@...fujitsu.com> wrote:


> kstopmachine is created, bound to the CPU1, and woken up here, but
> this process can't start to run because reschedule doesn't occur on
> CPU1. Hence CPU0 also be able to run because it's waiting completion
> of CPU1's offline work.
> 
Is this Bug ? It seems the system works as designed... 

Hmm,  adding stop_machine_run_interruptible() and 
using wait_for_completion_interruptible() instead of wait_for_completion()
is O.K. ? Then we can stop cpu hot-unplug by signal. Is this okay for you ?

-Kame

-
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/