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: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 21:01:05 -0600 From: Jack Steiner <steiner@....com> To: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com> Cc: Robin Holt <holt@....com>, Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@...ranet.com>, Avi Kivity <avi@...ranet.com>, Izik Eidus <izike@...ranet.com>, kvm-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, daniel.blueman@...drics.com Subject: Re: [patch 1/3] mmu_notifier: Core code On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 06:39:19PM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, Robin Holt wrote: > > > Jack has repeatedly pointed out needing an unregister outside the > > mmap_sem. I still don't see the benefit to not having the lock in the mm. > > I never understood why this would be needed. ->release removes the > mmu_notifier right now. Christoph - We discussed this earlier this week. Here is part of the mail: ------------ > > There currently is no __mmu_notifier_unregister(). Oversite??? > > No need. mmu_notifier_release implies an unregister and I think that is > the most favored way to release resources since it deals with the RCU > quiescent period. I currently unlink the mmu_notifier when the last GRU mapping is closed. For example, if a user does a: gru_create_context(); ... gru_destroy_context(); the mmu_notifier is unlinked and all task tables allocated by the driver are freed. Are you suggesting that I leave tables allocated until the task terminates?? Why is that better? What problem do I cause by trying to free tables as soon as they are not needed? ----------------------------------------------- > Christoph responded: > > the mmu_notifier is unlinked and all task tables allocated > > by the driver are freed. Are you suggesting that I leave tables > > allocated until the task terminates?? > > You need to leave the mmu_notifier structure allocated until the next > quiescent rcu period unless you use the release notifier. I assumed that I would need to use call_rcu() or synchronize_rcu() before the table is actually freed. That's still on my TODO list. --- jack -- 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