linux-kernel - Re: WARNING: at mm/page-writeback.c:1990 __set_page_dirty

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: <CA+55aFy2-X92EqpiuyvkBp_2-UaYDUpaC2c3XT3gXMN1O+T7sw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 1 Jun 2012 18:45:07 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
Cc:	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Cong Wang <amwang@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: WARNING: at mm/page-writeback.c:1990 __set_page_dirty_nobuffers+0x13a/0x170()

On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> +       spin_lock_irqsave(&zone->lock, flags);
>        for (page = start_page, pfn = start_pfn; page < end_page; pfn++,
>                                                                  page++) {

So holding the spinlock (and disabling irqs!) over the whole loop
sounds horrible.

At the same time, the iterators don't seem to require the spinlock, so
it should be possible to just move the lock into the loop, no?

                  Linus
--
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/