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: <20080620143220.GA441@tv-sign.ru>
Date:	Fri, 20 Jun 2008 18:32:20 +0400
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>,
	Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Eli Cohen <eli@....mellanox.co.il>,
	general@...ts.openfabrics.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: wait_for_completion_timeout() spurious failure under heavy load?

On 06/20, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> On 06/20, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > --- a/kernel/sched.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched.c
> > @@ -4405,6 +4405,16 @@ do_wait_for_common(struct completion *x, long timeout, int state)
> >  			spin_unlock_irq(&x->wait.lock);
> >  			timeout = schedule_timeout(timeout);
> >  			spin_lock_irq(&x->wait.lock);
> > +
> > +			/*
> > +			 * If the completion has arrived meanwhile
> > +			 * then return 1 jiffy time left:
> > +			 */
> > +			if (x->done && !timeout) {
> > +				timeout = 1;
> > +				break;
> > +			}
> > +
> >  			if (!timeout) {
> >  				__remove_wait_queue(&x->wait, &wait);
> >  				return timeout;
> 
> This is the real nitpick, but I wonder what is the right behaviour
> of wait_for_completion_timeout(x, 0) when x->done != 0. Perhaps we
> can return 1 in that case too, just for the consistency?
> 
> IOW, how about the patch below? this also makes the code a bit
> simpler because we factor out __remove_wait_queue().

Even better, we can kill the first __remove_wait_queue() as well.

Oleg.

--- kernel/sched.c
+++ kernel/sched.c
@@ -4739,22 +4739,20 @@ do_wait_for_common(struct completion *x,
 			     signal_pending(current)) ||
 			    (state == TASK_KILLABLE &&
 			     fatal_signal_pending(current))) {
-				__remove_wait_queue(&x->wait, &wait);
-				return -ERESTARTSYS;
+				timeout = -ERESTARTSYS;
+				break;
 			}
 			__set_current_state(state);
 			spin_unlock_irq(&x->wait.lock);
 			timeout = schedule_timeout(timeout);
 			spin_lock_irq(&x->wait.lock);
-			if (!timeout) {
-				__remove_wait_queue(&x->wait, &wait);
-				return timeout;
-			}
-		} while (!x->done);
+		} while (!x->done && timeout);
 		__remove_wait_queue(&x->wait, &wait);
+		if (!x->done)
+			return timeout;
 	}
 	x->done--;
-	return timeout;
+	return timeout ?: 1;
 }
 
 static long __sched

--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ