linux-kernel - Re: [patch] sched: fix set_task_cpu() and provide an unlocked runqueue variant

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:	Thu, 26 Nov 2009 15:09:23 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] sched: fix set_task_cpu() and provide an unlocked
 runqueue variant

On Thu, 2009-11-26 at 11:16 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > min_vruntime should only ever be poked at when holding the respective
> > rq->lock, even with a barrier a 64bit read on a 32bit machine can go all
> > funny.
> 
> Yeah, but we're looking at an unlocked runqueue.  But never mind...

The patch is also poking at rq->clock without rq->lock held... not very
nice.

Gah, I hate that we're doing migration things without holding both rq's,
this is making live so very interesting ;-)

--
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/