[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20070517233722.8d4be064.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 23:37:22 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>
Cc: Davi Arnaut <davi@...ent.com.br>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] timerfd/eventfd context lock doesn't protect against
poll_wait
On Thu, 17 May 2007 23:20:05 -0700 (PDT) Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 18 May 2007, Davi Arnaut wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > poll_wait() callback may modify the waitqueue without holding the
> > context private lock.
>
> Thx Davi, patch is correct. Nice catch. But at this point instead of
> ending up getting two locks, we may look into using Andrew suggestion of
> reusing the waitqueue lock. Is it universally considered a "legal"
> operation?
>
I think it's a reasonable thing to do in core kernel code. It'd be more
worrisome if it was done way down in some rarely-visited device driver.
btw, the code at present doesn't explicitly take care of WQ_FLAG_EXCLUSIVE.
I guess as you want wake-all behaviour that's OK, but it might be worth a
mention somewhrre.
hm, fs/signalfd.c is "Copyright (C) 2003 Linus Torvalds". He was before
his time, that lad.
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists