linux-kernel - [PATCH 0/1] sched: Check TASK_DEAD rather than EXIT_DEAD in schedule

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: <20131113154516.GA15810@redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:45:16 +0100
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 0/1] sched: Check TASK_DEAD rather than EXIT_DEAD in
	schedule_debug()

On 11/13, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 03:35:52PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > As for "nobody should use exit_state". I'll try to recheck, but iirc
> > we already discussed this... do you remember any reason why
> > schedule_debug() can't check prev->state == TASK_DEAD instead of
> > ->exit_state?
>
> I have no such memories :/ but a quick test shows that such a kernel
> does boot without issue.

probably my memory fools me. OK, it seems that you agree with this change,
hopefully we both can't be wrong ;)

> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>

Thanks! And since picked this series, perhaps you can also queue this
one?

Oleg.

--
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/