linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] sched: missing locking in sched

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]

Date:	Mon, 28 Apr 2008 09:24:57 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>, Paul Jackson <pj@....com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: missing locking in sched_domains code


* Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com> wrote:

>  
>  /*
> + * Protects against concurrent calls to detach_destroy_domains
> + * and arch_init_sched_domains.
> + */
> +static DEFINE_MUTEX(sched_domains_mutex);
> +
> +/*
>   * Partition sched domains as specified by the 'ndoms_new'
>   * cpumasks in the array doms_new[] of cpumasks. This compares
>   * doms_new[] to the current sched domain partitioning, doms_cur[].
> @@ -7756,7 +7762,8 @@ void partition_sched_domains(int ndoms_n
>  	int i, j;
>  
>  	lock_doms_cur();
> -
> +	mutex_lock(&sched_domains_mutex);

i might be missing something but why not make doms_cur_mutex locking 
unconditional and extend it to detach_destroy_domains() as well?

	Ingo
--
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/