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
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2010 08:33:35 +0900 From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp> To: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mingo@...e.hu Subject: Re: [PATCH] rcu_read_lock/unlock protect find_task_by_vpid call Paul E. McKenney wrote: > So we should remove the lockdep_tasklist_lock_is_held() and then > apply Sergey's patch, correct? Yes. rcu_lockdep_assert(rcu_read_lock_held()) in find_task_by_pid_ns() is correct and callers need to use rcu_read_lock(). As of 2.6.32, there are 20+ users who missed rcu_read_lock(). So, similar reports will be posted like popcorn. http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/linux-kernel/2009/12/11/4518016 -- 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