[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <30107.1280392460@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 09:34:20 +0100
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cred - synchronize rcu before releasing cred
Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> It is perfectly legal for an RCU callback to invoke call_rcu(). However,
> this should be used -only- to wait for RCU readers. If there are no
> RCU readers, the callback might be re-invoked in very short order,
> expecially on UP systems.
>
> Or am I misunderstanding what you mean by "require call_rcu() to be
> able to cope iwth requeueing"?
I mean for call_rcu() to be called on an object that's already been
call_rcu()'d but not yet processed.
For example if struct cred gets its usage count reduced to 0, __put_cred()
will call_rcu() it, but what happens if someone comes along and resurrects it
by increasing its usage count again? And what happens if the usage count is
reduced back to zero and __put_cred() calls call_rcu() again before
put_cred_rcu() has a chance to run?
David
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists