linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] avoid race condition in pick_next_task_fair in kernel/sched

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: <AANLkTik4PXpgkc_ob-INohfmlTwe3wqDmif_ohXBxHHX@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 29 Jun 2010 19:24:17 +0800
From:	shenghui <crosslonelyover@...il.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	mingo@...e.hu, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] avoid race condition in pick_next_task_fair in 
	kernel/sched_fair.c

2010/6/29 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>:
> On Tue, 2010-06-29 at 15:10 +0800, shenghui wrote:
>> I think some lock on the metadata can fix this issue, but we may
>> change plenty of code to add support for lock. I think the easist
>> way is just substacting nr_running before dequing tasks.
>
> But all that is fully serialized by the rq->lock.. so I'm really not
> seeing how this can happen.
>
>
>

I wonder is there any chance set_next_entity() can get NULL for
parameter se if so?
And will you please give me some instructions on where rq->lock
is required?

-- 


Thanks and Best Regards,
shenghui
--
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/