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]
Message-ID: <1337103795.14207.343.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date:	Tue, 15 May 2012 13:43:15 -0400
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	RT <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH RT] rwsem_rt: Another (more sane) approach to mulit
 reader rt locks

On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 19:31 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 13:25 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 11:42 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 17:06 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 10:03 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > where readers may nest (the same task may grab the same rwsem for
> > > > > read multiple times), but only one task may hold the rwsem at any
> > > > > given
> > > > > time (for read or write).
> > > > 
> > > > Humm, that sounds iffy, rwsem isn't a recursive read lock only rwlock_t
> > > > is.
> > > 
> > > In that case, current -rt is broken. As it has it being a recursive lock
> > > (without my patch).
> 
> Nah not broken, just pointless. A recursive lock that's not used
> recursively is fine.

Heh, sure :-) But as -rt keeps it recursive, I didn't want to change
that.

> 
> > 
> > Why wouldn't it be recursive. If two different tasks are allowed to grab
> > a read lock at the same time, why can't the same task grab a read lock
> > twice? As long as it releases it the same amount of times.
> > 
> > Now you can't grab a read lock if you have the write lock.
> 
> rwsem is fifo-fair, if a writer comes in between the second read
> acquisition (even by the same task) would block and you'd be a deadlock
> since the write won't succeed since you're still holding a reader.

Yep agreed. And this patch didn't change that either.

-- Steve


--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ