linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] wait_task_inactive: don't consider task->nivcsw

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: <20080727195513.5BE65154284@magilla.localdomain>
Date:	Sun, 27 Jul 2008 12:55:13 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
Cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	mingo@...e.hu, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wait_task_inactive: don't consider task->nivcsw

> If wait_task_inactive() returns success the task was deactivated.
> In that case schedule() always increments ->nvcsw which alone can
> be used as a "generation counter".

Thanks, that looks fine to me.

> Q: perhaps it is better to do "ncsw = (p->nvcsw << 1) | 1" ? This
> decreases the possibility of "was it unscheduled" false positive
> when ->nvcsw == 0.

That makes sense.


Thanks,
Roland
--
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/