linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 16/25] PM / Domains: don't use [delayed_]work

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: <20121225170328.GH10220@mtj.dyndns.org>
Date:	Tue, 25 Dec 2012 09:03:28 -0800
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/25] PM / Domains: don't use [delayed_]work_pending()

Hello, Rafael.

On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 12:57:20PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, December 21, 2012 05:57:06 PM Tejun Heo wrote:
> > There's no need to test whether a (delayed) work item in pending
> > before queueing, flushing or cancelling it.  Most uses are unnecessary
> > and quite a few of them are buggy.
> 
> Is the particular one you're removing from domain.c buggy?

It's a bit difficult to tell without understanding the code base but
from quick glancing it looks like it could be.  The queueing and
actual excution don't grab the same lock, so there doesn't seem to be
anything work_pending() returning %true for a work item which already
started executing.  Even if the bug is there, it's likely to be very
difficult to trigger tho, so I wouldn't consider it an urgent fix.

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/