linux-kernel - Re: [patch] mm, hugetlb: add thread name and pid to SHM

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]

Message-Id: <20120308142335.e2dc17cb.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Thu, 8 Mar 2012 14:23:35 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc:	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [patch] mm, hugetlb: add thread name and pid to SHM_HUGETLB
 mlock rlimit warning

On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 14:08:30 -0800 (PST)
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 8 Mar 2012, Andrew Morton wrote:
> 
> > >  We have a get_task_comm() that does the task_lock() 
> > > internally but requires a TASK_COMM_LEN buffer in the calling code.  It's 
> > > just easier for the calling code to the task_lock() itself for a tiny 
> > > little printk().
> > 
> > Well for a tiny little printk we could just omit the locking?  The
> > printk() won't oops and once in a million years one person will see a
> > garbled comm[] string?
> > 
> 
> Sure, but task_lock() shouldn't be highly contended when the thread isn't 
> forking or exiting (everything else is attaching/detaching from a cgroup 
> or testing a mempolicy).  I've always added it (like in the oom killer for 
> the same reason) just because the race exists.  Taking it for every thread 
> on the system for one call to the oom killer has never slowed it down.

I wasn't concerned about the performance side of things - just that
it's such a pain over such a silly thing.

btw, if the code had done

	printk_once(..., get_task_comm(...), ...)

the task_lock() would have been performed just a single time, rather
than every time.


--
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/