linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH-v3 1/4] idr: Percpu ida

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: <20130828135042.9e460b27699b52bb4eb53d9e@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Wed, 28 Aug 2013 13:50:42 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Kent Overstreet <kmo@...erainc.com>
Cc:	"Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@...ux-iscsi.org>,
	target-devel <target-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
	lf-virt <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	kvm-devel <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>, Asias He <asias@...hat.com>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...two.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH-v3 1/4] idr: Percpu ida

On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 13:44:54 -0700 Kent Overstreet <kmo@...erainc.com> wrote:

> > > > What guarantees that this wait will terminate?
> > > 
> > > It seems fairly clear to me from the break statement a couple lines up;
> > > if we were passed __GFP_WAIT we terminate iff we succesfully allocated a
> > > tag. If we weren't passed __GFP_WAIT we never actually sleep.
> > 
> > OK ;)  Let me rephrase.  What guarantees that a tag will become available?
> > 
> > If what we have here is an open-coded __GFP_NOFAIL then that is
> > potentially problematic.
> 
> It's the same semantics as a mempool, really - it'll succeed when a tag
> gets freed.

OK, that's reasonable if the code is being used to generate IO tags -
we expect the in-flight tags to eventually be returned.

But if a client of this code is using the allocator for something
totally different, there is no guarantee that the act of waiting will
result in any tags being returned.

(These are core design principles/constraints which should be
explicitly documented in a place where future readers will see them!)

--
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/