linux-kernel - Re: [tip:sched/core] sched: Pull up the might_sleep() check into cond

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 22 Jul 2009 19:56:43 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc:	Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>, hpa@...or.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...e.hu,
	linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:sched/core] sched: Pull up the might_sleep() check into 
 cond_resched()

On Wed, 2009-07-22 at 19:17 +0200, Frédéric Weisbecker wrote:

> Ah, I think I've got it. In case of !CONFIG_PREEMPT, the spinlocks of
> course don't play
> with preemption, making no change reflected in the preempt_count().
> The assumption of preempt_count() = 1
> is then false.

D'0h indeed. And I didn't hit that because the last time I build a !
CONFIG_PREEMPT kernel is like many years ago ;-)



--
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/