linux-kernel - down_killable implementations for every architecture

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]

Message-ID: <20080128231918.GB31101@parisc-linux.org>
Date:	Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:19:18 -0700
From:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
To:	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: down_killable implementations for every architecture


As part of the TASK_KILLABLE changes, we're going to need
down_killable().  Unfortunately, semaphores are implemented for every
architecture, which we should probably fix at some point.

On the plane ride down here, I did the necessary changes for each
architecture:

http://parisc-linux.org/~willy/down-killable/

I may have made mistakes.  Things to check:

 - The *_killable* functions should be exported for use by modules.
 - The down_killable implementation needs to check fatal_signal_pending,
   not signal_pending.
 - The task state needs to be set to TASK_KILLABLE, not
   TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE

It should only take a couple of minutes to verify your architecture.

-- 
Intel are signing my paycheques ... these opinions are still mine
"Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this
operating system, but compare it to ours.  We can't possibly take such
a retrograde step."
--
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/