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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 28 Apr 2008 10:32:22 +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
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: missing locking in sched_domains code

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

>  /* doms_cur_mutex serializes access to doms_cur[] array */
>  static DEFINE_MUTEX(doms_cur_mutex);
>  
> +static inline void lock_doms_cur(void)
> +{
> +	mutex_lock(&doms_cur_mutex);
> +}

> @@ -7813,8 +7811,10 @@ int arch_reinit_sched_domains(void)
>  	int err;
>  
>  	get_online_cpus();
> +	lock_doms_cur();

thanks, that looks a lot more clean already. May i ask for another 
thing, if you are hacking on this anyway? Please get rid of the 
lock_doms_cur() complication now that it's not conditional - an open 
coded mutex_lock(&sched_doms_mutex) looks more readable - it gives a 
clear idea about what's happening. Also, please rename sched_doms_mutex 
to something less tongue-twisting - such as sched_domains_mutex. Hm?

	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/