linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 02/21] workqueue: don't free pool->worker

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20130320172943.GC28968@htj.dyndns.org>
Date:	Wed, 20 Mar 2013 10:29:43 -0700
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/21] workqueue: don't free pool->worker_idr by RCU

On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 03:28:02AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> pool->worker_idr nor worker->id is not protected by RCU.
> don't need to free pool->worker_idr by RCU.
> 
> Just free it directly.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>
...
> @@ -3462,6 +3461,7 @@ static void put_unbound_pool(struct worker_pool *pool)
>  		destroy_worker(worker);
>  	WARN_ON(pool->nr_workers || pool->nr_idle);
>  
> +	idr_destroy(&pool->worker_idr);
>  	spin_unlock_irq(&pool->lock);
>  	mutex_unlock(&pool->manager_mutex);
>  	mutex_unlock(&pool->manager_arb);

I don't know about this one.  It is correct but I'd prefer to have all
frees grouped together in one function rather than scattered across
two functions.  It's not like idr_destroy() is expensive or anything.

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/