linux-kernel - Re: [Semaphore API] down_interruptible

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:	Tue, 16 Jun 2015 17:43:04 +0200
From:	Mason <slash.tmp@...e.fr>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
CC:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [Semaphore API] down_interruptible_timeout

On 15/06/2015 18:56, Thomas Gleixner wrote:

> On Mon, 15 Jun 2015, Mason wrote:
> 
>> A) process-context kernel thread fills a FIFO and calls down(&fifo_empty);
>> B) ISR handles the FIFO-empty interrupt with up(&fifo_empty);
>>
>> However, in case something goes wrong and the interrupt never fires,
>> I don't want the process to be stuck in an uninterruptible sleep.
>>
>> Perhaps I can set a tiny timeout (e.g. 10 µs) and not worry about
>> the interruptible part for such a small duration? (Hmm, __down_common
>> calls schedule_timeout, which is jiffies-based. I don't think there
>> is a hrtimers flavor. So µs timeouts would be off the table?)
>>
>> Or I could use the interruptible version, and let the user kill the
>> operation if necessary.
> 
> Use a completion.

Thanks for the pointer. I will also read the following LKML thread.
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/664514

Regards.

--
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/