linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] cgroups: use sighand lock instead of tasklist_lock in cgroup_attach

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:	Fri, 14 Oct 2011 14:15:49 +0200
From:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To:	Ben Blum <bblum@...rew.cmu.edu>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	Paul Menage <paul@...lmenage.org>,
	Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>,
	Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] cgroups: use sighand lock instead of tasklist_lock
 in cgroup_attach_proc

Hi Ben,

On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 08:31:15PM -0400, Ben Blum wrote:
> Use sighand lock instead of tasklist_lock in cgroup_attach_proc.

Could you please feed more the changelog to explain the reason of
the change? Well, the reason of converting tasklist_lock based locking to
something more granular is almost obvious these days, but
it would be nice to know why it is safe to do so. And what exactly
that protects.

Thanks.
--
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/