linux-kernel - RE: FW: avoiding run

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]

Date:	Wed, 15 Jul 2009 11:52:39 -0700
From:	"Anirban Sinha" <ASinha@...gmasystems.com>
To:	"Oleg Nesterov" <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc:	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: FW: avoiding run_workqueue() recursion

Hi Oleg:

>If we just return silently, we do not flush but hide the problem ?
>And in this can lead to other problems which are very hard to
>trigger/debug.

True. I think flushing is an invalid operation for a thread that is
already walking the work-queue, like keventd. It is inherently bug in
the code somewhere else (may be in a work function?). I liked your idea
of replacing WARN_ON() with BUG_ON() but I do understand that a panic
could be a bigger hammer here. May be we can have some sort of
restrictions or conventions for writing work functions?  I don't know. 

Ani

--
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/