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: <20131128133152.GA821@redhat.com>
Date:	Thu, 28 Nov 2013 14:31:52 +0100
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>, zhang.yi20@....com.cn,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH]: exec: avoid propagating PF_NO_SETAFFINITY into
	userspace child

On 11/28, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 12:45:42PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > It has? khelper is a workqueue thread, this flag is set by create_worker().
> >
> > And it does kernel_thread() (not kthread_create()) so the child gets this
> > flag too.
>
> Urgh, but that's still completely wrong. khelper is a singlethread
> workqueue, those should be unbound and therefore should not have this
> flag set at all.

Well. This is debatable, but I leave this to you and Tejun ;)

But:

> In fact, I know people want to set affinity on khelper

This is not that simple. Note that khelper itself is the rescuer thread,
it doesn't not process the works. There are other kworker/u* threads which
run the work queued on khelper_wq. There is a pool of threads.

> to ensure all the
> usermode helper tasks get spawned on the specific system-cpus and leave
> the rest of the system unperturbed.

I _guess_ usermodehelper_init() should use WQ_SYSFS then, and in this case
the user can write to wq_cpumask_store somewhere in /sys/.

Not sure I read this code correctly though, I didn't check.

But PF_NO_SETAFFINITY should be cleared on exec anyway, so I still think
the patch does the right thing.

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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ