linux-kernel - Re: v2.6.26-rc7/cgroups: circular locking dependency

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

Message-ID: <4863D59E.3070604@qualcomm.com>
Date:	Thu, 26 Jun 2008 10:45:02 -0700
From:	Max Krasnyansky <maxk@...lcomm.com>
To:	Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>
CC:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>,
	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Paul Jackson <pj@....com>
Subject: Re: v2.6.26-rc7/cgroups: circular locking dependency

Paul Menage wrote:
> Second idea - can we just punt the call to rebuild_sched_domains() to
> a workqueue thread if it's due to a flag or cpumask change? Does it
> matter if the call doesn't happen synchronously? The work handler
> could easily nest the cgroup_lock() call inside get_online_cpus() and
> then call rebuild_sched_domains()

I was thinking about exactly the same thing. I kind of don't like async 
nature of it. Maybe it's ok but there might be some interesting races 
with async domain updates.

Max
--
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/