linux-kernel - Re: UMH_WAIT_EXEC->UMH_WAIT

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: <20120521181244.GA3668@redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 21 May 2012 20:12:44 +0200
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>, tj@...nel.org
Cc:	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, bharrosh@...asas.com,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: UMH_WAIT_EXEC->UMH_WAIT_PROC deadlock

forgot to mention...

On 05/21, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> Another issue is that Tejun dislikes the usage of system_unbound_wq.
> I guess, because WQ_UNBOUND implies WQ_HIGHPRI. Btw, I do not really
> understand why. And, otoh, I don't think that __call_usermodehelper()
> should be bound to any CPU, this would look a bit strange to me.

and please note that currently khelper_wq is WQ_UNBOUND anyway.

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/