linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] [PATCH 1/2] cgroups: read-write lock CLONE

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: <6599ad831003221657q61e20286q49b2ef39b3999b05@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 22 Mar 2010 16:57:05 -0700
From:	Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc:	Ben Blum <bblum@...rew.cmu.edu>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
	lizf@...fujitsu.com, matthltc@...ibm.com,
	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH 1/2] cgroups: read-write lock CLONE_THREAD forking 
	per threadgroup

On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 3:22 AM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> Please use ->signal instead. By the lucky coincidence the lifetime rules
> for (greatly misnamed) signal_struct were changed recently in -mm.
>
> With the recent changes, it is always safe to use task->signal. It can't
> be changed, can't go away, no need to bump the counter, no races, etc.
>
> What do you think?

If signal_struct is much simpler to reason about, then using it seems
like a good idea.

Paul
--
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/