linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] Add prctl to set sibling thread names

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]

Message-ID: <1257448275.3923.1.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Thu, 05 Nov 2009 11:11:15 -0800
From:	john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>
To:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	Darren Hart <dvhltc@...ibm.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Mike Fulton <fultonm@...ibm.com>,
	Sean Foley <Sean_Foley@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Add prctl to set sibling thread names

On Thu, 2009-11-05 at 14:42 +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > >> KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> John, I'd prefer to suggested another design.
> > >>> How about this?
> > >>>
> > >>> 1. remove pid argument from prctl
> > >>> 2. cancel pthread_setname_np()
> > >>> 3. instead, create pthread_attr_setname_np()
> > >>> 4. pthread_create() change own thread name by pthread_attr.
> > >>>
> > >>> It avoid many racy problem automatically.
> > >> Perhaps, but it also greatly reduces the flexibility of the 
> > >> implementation by restricting name changes to create time.
> > > 
> > > Hm.
> > > if your program really need to change another thread name, can you please tell us
> > > why it is necessary and when it is used?
> > 
> > I think John's previous mails covered that pretty well. As for doing the 
> > name change at create time, or sometime later, it just seems to me that 
> > the flexibility of doing so later is worth having. While I know we don't 
> > have to follow other systems implementations, in this case 
> > pthread_setname_np() seems a reasonable model to follow to me.
> 
> You only said your mode is more flexible. but I want to know _why_ this flexibiliby is
> necessay. please tell us concrete use-case.

You can read Sean's example from this thread here:
	http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/10/27/259

thanks
-john


--
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/