linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] task containersv11 add tasks file interface fix for cpusets

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: <alpine.DEB.0.9999.0710061047400.24311@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date:	Sat, 6 Oct 2007 10:54:35 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To:	Paul Jackson <pj@....com>
cc:	Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	nickpiggin@...oo.com.au, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, serue@...ibm.com,
	clg@...ibm.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	ebiederm@...ssion.com, svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, xemul@...nvz.org,
	containers@...ts.osdl.org, balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] task containersv11 add tasks file interface fix for
 cpusets

On Sat, 6 Oct 2007, Paul Jackson wrote:

> This isn't working for me.
> 
> The key kernel routine for updating a tasks cpus_allowed
> cannot be called while holding a spinlock.
> 
> But the above loop holds a spinlock, css_set_lock, between
> the cgroup_iter_start and the cgroup_iter_end.
> 
> I end up generating complaints of:
> 	BUG: scheduling while atomic
> when I invoke the set_cpus_allowed() above.
> 
> Should css_set_lock be a mutex?  Locking changes like that
> can be risky.
> 

It would probably be better to just save references to the tasks.

	struct cgroup_iter it;
	struct task_struct *p, **tasks;
	int i = 0;

	cgroup_iter_start(cs->css.cgroup, &it);
	while ((p = cgroup_iter_next(cs->css.cgroup, &it))) {
		get_task_struct(p);
		tasks[i++] = p;
	}
	cgroup_iter_end(cs->css.cgroup, &it);

	while (--i >= 0) {
		set_cpus_allowed(tasks[i], cs->cpus_allowed);
		put_task_struct(tasks[i]);
	}

The getting and putting of the tasks will prevent them from exiting or 
being deallocated prematurely.  But this is also a critical section that 
will need to be protected by some mutex so it doesn't race with other 
set_cpus_allowed().

		David
-
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/