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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 10:43:28 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> To: Chen Gang <gang.chen@...anux.com> cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, laijs@...fujitsu.com, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel/kthread.c: need spin_lock_irq() for 'worker' before main looping, since it can "WARN_ON(worker->task)". On Wed, 19 Jun 2013, Chen Gang wrote: > > Since "WARN_ON(worker->task)", we can not assume that 'worker->task' > will be NULL before set 'current' to it. It better is NULL and all that WARN_ON does is to verify that. > So need let 'worker' lock protected too, just like it already lock > protected all time in main looping. No. That's pointless. This happens when the new worker starts up and there is nothing which can modify worker->task at this point. Thanks, tglx -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists