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: <4AEB2885.5040406@nortel.com>
Date:	Fri, 30 Oct 2009 11:55:17 -0600
From:	"Chris Friesen" <cfriesen@...tel.com>
To:	Darren Hart <dvhltc@...ibm.com>
CC:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	"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 10/29/2009 07:45 PM, Darren Hart wrote:

> This appears to work fine. Can anyone think of a reason why this is an unsafe
> thing to do? I'll have to create a much more elaborate test case and review
> the glibc code of course to make sure the glibc mutex state isn't compromised.

Setting aside the specific code details, I would suggest that you not
review the glibc code but rather review the glibc documentation and the
susv3/posix specifications.  That way, if it behaves according to the
spec but breaks glibc you can push for a patch to glibc.

If it happens to work with current glibc but is not standards-compliant,
then it could break in the future.

Chris
--
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/