linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 11/18] sched: Add p->pi_lock to task_rq

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]

Date:	Wed, 05 Jan 2011 20:33:34 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc:	Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
	Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@...sony.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>, Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
	Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 11/18] sched: Add p->pi_lock to task_rq_lock()

On Wed, 2011-01-05 at 19:46 +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:

> One purely cosmetic nit,

Fixed those, thanks!

> Hmm, and normalize_rt_tasks(), it could just do task_rq_lock/task_rq_unlock.
> And why it does read_lock_irqsave(tasklist), btw? _irqsave looks unneeded. 

I'm not quite sure, I think we can make that an RCU iteration of the
taskset as well, no need to even hold the task-lock, it would render the
sysrq button useless in the face of a RT fork bomb, but I'm not sure we
really care about that at all.

Ingo, Thomas?
--
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/