linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH][RFC] Handle improbable possibility of io

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:	Wed, 29 Apr 2009 00:59:30 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Nikanth Karthikesan <knikanth@...ell.com>
Cc:	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] Handle improbable possibility of
 io_context->refcount overflow

On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 12:21:39 +0530 Nikanth Karthikesan <knikanth@...ell.com> wrote:

> Hi Jens
> 
> Currently io_context has an atomic_t(int) as refcount. In case of cfq, for
> each device a task does I/O, a reference to the io_context would be taken. And
> when there are multiple process sharing io_contexts(CLONE_IO) would also have
> a reference to the same io_context. Theoretically the possible maximum number
> of processes sharing the same io_context + the number of disks/cfq_data
> referring to the same io_context can overflow the 32-bit counter on a very
> high-end machine. Even though it is an improbable case, let us make it
> difficult by changing the refcount to atomic64_t(long).
> 

Sorry, atomic64_t isn't implemented on 32 bit architectures.

Perhaps it should be, but I expect it'd be pretty slow.

--
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/