linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] add task handling notifier: base definitions

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: <p7363yrfwu3.fsf@bingen.suse.de>
Date:	Sat, 22 Dec 2007 00:32:20 +0100
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	"Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@...ell.com>
Cc:	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] add task handling notifier: base definitions

"Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@...ell.com> writes:

> This is the base patch, adding notification for task creation and
> deletion.

I like the basic concept. At some point I suspect we'll even need
a per task dynamic data allocator, that would remove even
more cruft.

Could you change the block notifier calls first to not take their lock
when there is nothing in the list (the common case)? It is 
weird that they don't already do this, but they should definitely
here.

I think the use of the blocking/atomic notifiers needs some comment.
I think I understand why you did it -- exit atomic because sleeping
in exit can be illegal and blocking for fork to allow GFP_KERNEL
allocations -- but that should be documented somewhere.

-Andi
--
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/