linux-kernel - Re: + drivers-wait-for-threaded-probes-between-initcall-levels.patch added to -mm tree

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20061026100939.24bbf536@gondolin.boeblingen.de.ibm.com>
Date:	Thu, 26 Oct 2006 10:09:39 +0200
From:	Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	akpm@...l.org, greg@...ah.com
Subject: Re: +
 drivers-wait-for-threaded-probes-between-initcall-levels.patch added to -mm
 tree

On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 19:12:01 -0700,
akpm@...l.org wrote:

> Subject: drivers: wait for threaded probes between initcall levels
> From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
> 
> The multithreaded-probing code has a problem: after one initcall level (eg,
> core_initcall) has been processed, we will then start processing the next
> level (postcore_initcall) while the kernel threads which are handling
> core_initcall are still executing.  This breaks the guarantees which the
> layered initcalls previously gave us.
> 
> IOW, we want to be multithreaded _within_ an initcall level, but not between
> different levels.
> 
> Fix that up by causing the probing code to wait for all outstanding probes at
> one level to complete before we start processing the next level.
> 
> Cc: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>

Makes a lot of sense. I guess we could also get rid of
driver_probe_done() in prepare_namespace() with this patch...


> +#ifdef CONFIG_PCI_MULTITHREAD_PROBE
> +static int __init wait_for_probes(void)
> +{
> +	DEFINE_WAIT(wait);
> +
> +	if (!atomic_read(&probe_count))
> +		return 0;
> +	printk(KERN_INFO "%s: waiting for %d threads\n", __FUNCTION__,
> +			atomic_read(&probe_count));
> +	while (atomic_read(&probe_count)) {
> +		prepare_to_wait(&probe_waitqueue, &wait, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
> +		if (atomic_read(&probe_count))
> +			schedule();
> +	}
> +	finish_wait(&probe_waitqueue, &wait);
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +core_initcall_sync(wait_for_probes);
> +postcore_initcall_sync(wait_for_probes);
> +arch_initcall_sync(wait_for_probes);
> +subsys_initcall_sync(wait_for_probes);
> +fs_initcall_sync(wait_for_probes);
> +device_initcall_sync(wait_for_probes);
> +late_initcall_sync(wait_for_probes);
> +#endif

...if we get rid of this #ifdef.

-- 
Cornelia Huck
Linux for zSeries Developer
Tel.: +49-7031-16-4837, Mail: cornelia.huck@...ibm.com
-
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/