linux-kernel - Q: wait_task_inactive() and !CONFIG_SMP && CONFIG

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 27 Jul 2008 16:15:40 +0400
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
To:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc:	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, roland@...hat.com, mingo@...e.hu,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Q: wait_task_inactive() and !CONFIG_SMP && CONFIG_PREEMPT

Without CONFIG_SMP wait_task_inactive() is noop, this doesn't look right.
Shouldn't we also take CONFIG_PREEMPT into account?

Not that it really matters, just curious. kthread_bind() itself could be
noop without CONFIG_SMP. ptrace_check_attach() shouldn't have real problems,
but still.

Also, the !SMP version of wait_task_inactive() always returns 1, this
doesn't conform to the comment near kernel/sched.c:wait_task_inactive().

Oleg.

--
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/