linux-kernel - Hi, I have one question about rt

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]

Date:	Thu, 10 May 2007 15:34:30 +0800
From:	Li Yu <raise.sail@...il.com>
To:	Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>
CC:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Hi, I have one question about rt_mutex.

Hi, Steven.

Nice to meet you again.

I have read the rt-mutex-design.txt that you wrote. That is excellent
description of rt_mutex. But I have a question for rt_mutex.

As you said:

> Now since mutexes can be defined by user-land applications, we don't
want a DOS
> type of application that nests large amounts of mutexes to create a large
> PI chain, and have the code holding spin locks while looking at a large
> amount of data. So to prevent this, the implementation not only implements
> a maximum lock depth, but also only holds at most two different locks at a
> time, as it walks the PI chain. More about this below.

After read the implementation of rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain(), I found
the we really require maximin lock depth (1024 default), but I can not
see the check for more same locks duplication. Does this doc is
inconsistent with code?

Thanks in advanced.

Good luck.
- Li Yu
-
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/