linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/9] Containers (V9): Generic Process Containers

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:	Mon, 30 Apr 2007 10:09:38 -0700
From:	"Paul Menage" <menage@...gle.com>
To:	vatsa@...ibm.com, "Paul Jackson" <pj@....com>
Cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, dev@...ru, xemul@...ru,
	serue@...ibm.com, ebiederm@...ssion.com, haveblue@...ibm.com,
	svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, balbir@...ibm.com,
	ckrm-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	rohitseth@...gle.com, mbligh@...gle.com, containers@...ts.osdl.org,
	devel@...nvz.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] Containers (V9): Generic Process Containers

On 4/30/07, Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ibm.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 02:37:21AM -0700, Paul Jackson wrote:
> > It builds and boots and mounts the cpuset file system ok.
> > But trying to write the 'mems' file hangs the system hard.
>
> Basically we are attempting a read_lock(&tasklist_lock) in
> container_task_count() after taking write_lock_irq(&tasklist_lock) in
> update_nodemask()!

Paul, is there any reason why we need to do a write_lock() on
tasklist_lock if we're just trying to block fork, or is it just
historical accident? Wouldn't it be fine to do a read_lock()?

Paul
-
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/