linux-kernel - Re: [kernel.org users] [KORG] Panics on master backend

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 29 Aug 2011 16:38:55 +0200
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@...sony.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, users@...nel.org,
	hch <hch@...radead.org>, "yong.zhang0" <yong.zhang0@...il.com>,
	scameron@...rdog.cce.hp.com, Jens Axboe <jaxboe@...ionio.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...isc-linux.org>
Subject: Re: [kernel.org users] [KORG] Panics on master backend

On 08/29, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2011-08-25 at 15:54 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > Isn't us holding ->pi_lock sufficient to stabilize task_cpu()? If its a
> > > running task the initial ->state check would have failed,
> >
> > Of course it is not TASK_RUNNING, but it can be running or not.
> >
> > > and thus its a
> > > proper wakeup when we get here and thus ->pi_lock is serializing things.
> >
> > I am not sure. If ->on_rq is true, we need rq->lock. Say, pull_task() can
> > change its cpu.
>
> If its !TASK_RUNNING but ->on_rq is true, it must be current, and
> pull_task() will never move current around.

You meant task_running() ? But it can be preempted in !TASK_RUNNING
state.

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/