linux-kernel - [PATCH 0/1] workqueue: don't migrate pending works from the dead 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 4 Feb 2007 23:33:05 +0300
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ibm.com>,
	"Pallipadi, Venkatesh" <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>,
	Gautham shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 0/1] workqueue: don't migrate pending works from the dead CPU

Andrew, please drop the workqueue-rework-threads-hotplug-management.patch,
and please take this one (feel free to just kill me instead).

We have workqueue callbacks (slab for example) which assume that CPU is
stable during the execution since cwq->thread is pinned to a processor.
With or without that patch this is not true with CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU, and
the problem is not connected to workqueue.c.

However, my patch makes the things worse, because CPU_UP_PREPARE creates
cwq->thread which is not pinned to CPU until CPU_ONLINE. This is solvable,
but needs a serious complication, so this patch can't be considered as a
cleanup.

The new patch removes take_over_work() and friends (as the old one did),
but retains an unfortunate property of the current implementation: the
workqueue_mutex is held from CPU_LOCK_ACQUIRE to CPU_LOCK_RELEASE, and
CPU_DEAD stops cwq->thread synchronously.

This means that cpu-hotplug callbacks can't create/destroy workqueues
(Gautham needs this?), and work->func() can't share a lock with cpu hotplug.
May be we can change this later, but this needs a separate patch.

Srivatsa, do you have any objections?

The new patch is very similar (in fact, a subset), I don't send incremental
update because this will break changelogs.

Oleg.

-
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/