linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] kmemleak: Scan all thread stacks

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]

Date:	Fri, 17 Jul 2009 17:57:06 +0100
From:	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] kmemleak: Scan all thread stacks

On Fri, 2009-07-17 at 18:43 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com> wrote:
> > 2. Is it safe to use rcu_read_lock() and task_lock() when scanning the
> >    corresponding kernel stack (thread_info structure)? The loop doesn't
> >    do any modification to the task list. The reason for this is to
> >    allow kernel preemption when scanning the stacks.
> 
> you cannot generally preempt while holding the RCU read-lock.

This may work with rcupreempt enabled. But, with classic RCU is it safe
to call schedule (or cond_resched) while holding the RCU read-lock?

Thanks.

-- 
Catalin

--
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/