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, 28 Aug 2011 20:01:06 +0200 From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> Cc: rjw@...k.pl, paul@...lmenage.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, arnd@...db.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/16] freezer: fix set_freezable[_with_signal]() race On 08/19, Tejun Heo wrote: > > A kthread doing set_freezable*() may race with on-going PM freeze and > the freezer might think all tasks are frozen while the new freezable > kthread is marrily proceeding to execute code paths which aren't > supposed to be executing during PM freeze. Yes, > +bool __set_freezable(bool with_signal) > +{ > + might_sleep(); > + > + /* > + * Modify flags while holding freezer_lock. This ensures the > + * freezer notices that we aren't frozen yet or the freezing > + * condition is visible to try_to_freeze() below. > + */ > + spin_lock_irq(&freezer_lock); > + current->flags &= ~PF_NOFREEZE; > + if (with_signal) > + current->flags &= ~PF_FREEZER_NOSIG; > + spin_unlock_irq(&freezer_lock); > + > + return try_to_freeze(); > +} You know, I was really, really puzzled by this change. Because it "obviously can fix nothing", and try_to_freeze() makes no sense (ignoring the very unlikely case when TIF_FREEZING was set right after we drop freezer_lock). But I guess this works along with 14/16 which removes TIF_FREEZING. Oleg. -- 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