linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH take 2] UBIFS

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4836E057.7020307@yandex.ru>
Date:	Fri, 23 May 2008 18:18:47 +0300
From:	Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind@...dex.ru>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
CC:	Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@...ia.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Adrian Hunter <ext-adrian.hunter@...ia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH take 2] UBIFS - new flash file system

Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>  - the mainoop of ubifs_bg_thread looks a bit odd either, when you
>    first to an interruotible sleep and then possible one while you
>    still have TASK_RUNNING set.  Also the need_bgt flag is not needed
>    because the thrad is only woken up to perform it's action.
>    In the end the main loop should look something like:
> 
> 	while (1) {
> 		if (kthread_should_stop())
> 			break;
> 		if (try_to_freeze())
> 			continue;
> 
> 		run_bg_commit(c);
> 
> 		set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
> 		schedule();
> 		__set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
> 	}

Err, how are we guaranteed that we do not miss wake-up events then,
if we were woken up say, between run_bg_commit(c) and
set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE) ? This was  the purpose
of the 'need_bgt' flag.

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)
--
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/