linux-kernel - Re: futex question

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: <1254745119.26976.43.camel@twins>
Date:	Mon, 05 Oct 2009 14:18:39 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	Anirban Sinha <ani@...rban.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Darren Hart <dvhltc@...ibm.com>,
	Kaz Kylheku <kaz@...gmasystems.com>,
	Anirban Sinha <asinha@...gmasystems.com>
Subject: Re: futex question

On Mon, 2009-10-05 at 13:59 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Stared at the same place a minute ago :) But still I wonder if it's a
> good idea to silently release locks and set the state to OWNERDEAD
> instead of hitting the app programmer with a big clue stick in case
> the app holds locks when calling execve().

Agreed, I rather like the feedback. With regular exit like things
there's just not much we can do to avoid the mess, but here we can
actually avoid it, seems a waste not to do so.

--
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/