linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] kernel/pid.c pid allocation wierdness

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:	Wed, 14 Mar 2007 18:33:41 +0300
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
To:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc:	Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...ru>,
	Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ibm.com>,
	Serge Hallyn <serue@...ibm.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Containers <containers@...ts.osdl.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] kernel/pid.c pid allocation wierdness

On 03/14, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...ru> writes:
> 
> > Hi.
> >
> > I'm looking at how alloc_pid() works and can't understand
> > one (simple/stupid) thing.
> >
> > It first kmem_cache_alloc()-s a strct pid, then calls
> > alloc_pidmap() and at the end it taks a global pidmap_lock()
> > to add new pid to hash.

We need some global lock. pidmap_lock is already here, and it is
only used to protect pidmap->page allocation. Iow, it is almost
unused. So it was very natural to re-use it while implementing
pidrefs.

> > The question is - why does alloc_pidmap() use at least
> > two atomic ops and potentially loop to find a zero bit
> > in pidmap? Why not call alloc_pidmap() under pidmap_lock
> > and find zero pid in pidmap w/o any loops and atomics?

Currently we search for zero bit lockless, why do you want
to do it under spin_lock ?

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/