linux-kernel - Re: Should we use preempt_disable() in sleep_on

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: <20091203071507.GJ9121@core.coreip.homeip.net>
Date:	Wed, 2 Dec 2009 23:15:07 -0800
From:	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Cc:	liu pf <kernelfans@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Should we use preempt_disable() in sleep_on_common()?

On Wed, Dec 02, 2009 at 11:12:44PM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 02, 2009 at 11:07:46PM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > On Thu, 3 Dec 2009 14:49:14 +0800
> > liu pf <kernelfans@...il.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi:
> > > 
> > > I am puzzled with the following scenario. Could anyone enlighten me?
> > 
> > 
> > sleep_on family of APIs is very racy and just cannot be used correctly;
> > I'm not surprised that there's a preempt race in it, but trust me, it's
> > not the biggest race... never ever use these APIs!!!
> > 
> > 
> 
> BTW, why do we still have them? I checked couple and they don't seem to
> be used...
> 

Ah, my bad, I now see interruptible_sleep_on used all over drivers/char...

-- 
Dmitry
--
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/