linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] first callers of process_deny

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: <1223585671.11830.40.camel@nimitz>
Date:	Thu, 09 Oct 2008 13:54:31 -0700
From:	Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
Cc:	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	arnd@...db.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] first callers of process_deny_checkpoint()

On Thu, 2008-10-09 at 14:43 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Hmm, I don't know too much about aio, but is it possible to succeed with
> io_getevents if we didn't first do a submit?  It looks like the contexts
> are looked up out of current->mm, so I don't think we need this call
> here.
> 
> Otherwise, this is neat.

Good question.  I know nothing, either. :)

My thought was that any process *trying* to do aio stuff of any kind is
going to be really confused if it gets checkpointed.  Or, it might try
to submit an aio right after it checks the list of them.  I thought it
best to be cautious and say, if you screw with aio, no checkpointing for
you!

-- Dave

--
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/