[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1309122157300.4089@ionos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 21:58:05 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>
cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Dave Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...onical.com>,
Thomas Hellstrom <thellstrom@...are.com>,
intel-gfx <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] completely bonkers use of set_need_resched +
VM_FAULT_NOPAGE
On Thu, 12 Sep 2013, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 6:22 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> > If 'sane' userspace is never supposed to do this, then only insane
> > userspace is going to hurt from this and that's a GOOD (tm) thing,
> > right? ;-)
>
> Afaik sane userspace doesn't hit the _deadlock_ (or lifelock if we
> have the set_need_resched in there). drm/i915 is a bit different since
> we have just one lock, and so the same design would actually deadlock
> even for sane userspace. But hitting contention there and yielding is
> somewhat expected. Obviously shouldn't happen too often since it'll
> hurt performance, with either blocking or the yield spinning loop.
So this is actually a non priviledged DoS interface, right?
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