linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] TASK

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]

Message-ID: <46FA4916.10103@emc.com>
Date:	Wed, 26 Sep 2007 07:57:10 -0400
From:	Ric Wheeler <ric@....com>
To:	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
	Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
	Mark Lord <mlord@...ox.com>,
	Valerie Henson <val.henson@...il.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Suparna Bhattacharya <suparna@...ibm.com>,
	Andreas Dilger <adilger@...sterfs.com>
CC:	Bob Bell <b_lkml@...bellsplace.com>,
	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>, trond@...app.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] TASK_KILLABLE version 2

Bob Bell wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 08:43:49PM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>> Here's the second version of TASK_KILLABLE.  A few changes since 
>> version 1:
> <snip>
>> I obviously haven't covered every place that can result in a process
>> sleeping uninterruptibly while attempting an operation.  But sync_page
>> (patch 4/5) covers about 90% of the times I've attempted to kill cat,
>> and I hope that by providing the two examples, I can help other people
>> to fix the cases that they find interesting.
> 
> I've been testing this patch on my systems.  It's working for me when
> I read() a file.  Asynchronous write()s seem okay, too.  However,
> synchronous writes (caused by either calling fsync() or fcntl() to
> release a lock) prevent the process from being killed when the NFS
> server goes down.

After hearing again last month about how few people actually read every 
lkml thread, I  wanted to point you all at this thread explicitly since 
it seems that we are getting somewhat close to having a forced unmount 
that actually is usable by real applications, something that we seem to 
have been talking about for many years ;-)

With Matthew's original TASK_KILLABLE patch, we have a solution for a 
task read, but still have some holes (fsync & fcntl, others?) that need 
fixed as well for NFS clients.

Is this patch going in the right direction?

ric



-
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/