linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] RFC: futex: make futex_lock

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: <200910290939.32485.arnd@arndb.de>
Date:	Thu, 29 Oct 2009 09:39:32 +0100
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Darren Hart <dvhltc@...ibm.com>
Cc:	"lkml, " <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Dinakar Guniguntala <dino@...ibm.com>,
	"Stultz, John" <johnstul@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RFC: futex: make futex_lock_pi interruptible

On Tuesday 27 October 2009, Darren Hart wrote:
> The following C test case demonstrates how this patch could be used to
> implement interruptible locking. There is an awful lot of debug code and
> some other relics of a hacked together test in there now, but if anyone
> wanted to test the futex changes, this will do the trick.
> 

Your test program uses a signal handler to interrupt the mutex. If you
are using a signal handler already to implement a user space mutex_cancel,
why can't you just do a longjmp out of the signal handler rather than
modifying the kernel?

	Arnd <><
--
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/