linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] fix-flush_workqueue-vs-cpu

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:	Tue, 9 Jan 2007 06:41:06 +0530
From:	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ibm.com>
To:	"Pallipadi, Venkatesh" <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>
Cc:	"Oleg Nesterov" <oleg@...sign.ru>, "Andrew Morton" <akpm@...l.org>,
	"David Howells" <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	"Christoph Hellwig" <hch@...radead.org>,
	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...l.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "Gautham shenoy" <ego@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix-flush_workqueue-vs-cpu_dead-race-update

On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 10:37:25AM -0800, Pallipadi, Venkatesh wrote:
> One other approach I was thinking about, was to do all the hardwork in
> workqueue CPU_DOWN_PREPARE callback rather than in CPU_DEAD.

Between DOWN_PREPARE and DEAD, more work can get added to the cpu's
workqueue. So DOWN_PREPARE is kind of early to take_over_work ..

> We can call cleanup_workqueue_thread and take_over_work in DOWN_PREPARE,
> With that, I don't think we need to hold the workqueue_mutex across 
> these two callbacks and eliminate the deadlocks related to
> flush_workqueue.
> Do you think this approach would simply things around here?

-- 
Regards,
vatsa
-
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/