linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/9 V3] workqueue: add non_manager_role_manager_mutex

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: <20120830091739.GA10874@dhcp-172-17-108-109.mtv.corp.google.com>
Date:	Thu, 30 Aug 2012 02:17:39 -0700
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/9 V3] workqueue: add
 non_manager_role_manager_mutex_unlock()

Hello, Lai.

On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 05:16:01PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> gcwq_unbind_fn() is unsafe even it is called from a work item.
> so we need non_manager_role_manager_mutex_unlock().
> 
> If rebind_workers() is called from a work item, it is safe when there is
> no CPU_INTENSIVE items. but we can't disable CPU_INTENSIVE items,
> so it is still unsafe, we need non_manager_role_manager_mutex_unlock() too.

Can you please elaborate?  Why is it not safe if there are
CPU_INTENSIVE items?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/