linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cpuidle: coupled: fix sleeping while atomic in cpu notifier

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: <201207262215.06372.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date:	Thu, 26 Jul 2012 22:15:06 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	Colin Cross <ccross@...roid.com>
Cc:	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...com>,
	Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpuidle: coupled: fix sleeping while atomic in cpu notifier

On Thursday, July 26, 2012, Colin Cross wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl> wrote:
> > On Wednesday, July 25, 2012, Colin Cross wrote:
> >> The cpu hotplug notifier gets called in both atomic and non-atomic
> >> contexts, it is not always safe to lock a mutex.  Filter out all events
> >> except the six necessary ones, which are all sleepable, before taking
> >> the mutex.
> >
> > I wonder what mutual exclusion mechanis we rely on when the mutex is not taken?
> 
> We don't need any mutual exclusion because the notifier returns immediately.

Don't we need to disable preemption even?
--
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/