linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] sched: sched_clock() clocksource handling.

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: <1243928495.23657.5642.camel@twins>
Date:	Tue, 02 Jun 2009 09:41:35 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Daniel Walker <dwalker@...o99.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.ml.walleij@...il.com>,
	Andrew Victor <linux@...im.org.za>,
	Haavard Skinnemoen <hskinnemoen@...el.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	John Stultz <johnstul@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: sched_clock() clocksource handling.

On Tue, 2009-06-02 at 16:35 +0900, Paul Mundt wrote:
> 
> We already do via select_clocksource(), if we are unregistering the
> current one then a new one with the flag set is selected. Before that,
> the override is likewise given preference, and we fall back on jiffies if
> there is nothing else. I suppose we could try and find the "best" one,
> but I think the override and manual clocksource selection should be fine
> for this.

Ah, ok. So unregister calls select_clocksource again? That does leave us
a small window with jiffies, but I guess that's ok.

> Now that you mention it though, the sched_clocksource() assignment within
> select_clocksource() happens underneath the clocksource_lock, but is not
> using rcu_assign_pointer().

Right, that would want fixing indeed.

>  If the assignment there needs to use
> rcu_assign_pointer() then presumably all of the unlock paths that do
> select_clocksource() will have to synchronize_rcu()?

No, you only have to do sync_rcu() when stuff that could have referenced
is going away and you cannot use call_rcu().

So when selecting a new clocksource, you don't need synchonization
because stuff doesn't go away (I think :-)
--
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/