linux-kernel - Re: Bug in scheduler when using rt

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, 19 Jan 2011 08:19:17 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
Cc:	Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@...il.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, samu.p.onkalo@...ia.com,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	tglx <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: Bug in scheduler when using rt_mutex


* Mike Galbraith <efault@....de> wrote:

> On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 14:09 +0800, Yong Zhang wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de> wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 12:35 +0800, Yong Zhang wrote:
> > >
> > >> cfs_rq->curr != se is always true.
> > >
> > > If that were always true, we'd illegally enqueue a running task.
> > 
> > I'm sorry that I'm not express myself correctly.
> 
> Human communication methods are all buggy as hell :)

Not to mention that they are slow, inefficient and ambiguous.

But wht did you expect? The original authors of the code are long gone and 
maintenance is done by newcomers who are patching the code bit by bit. What
you get from such a development model is pretty predictable: ~1 billion years
old spaghetti DNA that no-one truly understands.

	Ingo
--
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/