linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] initial while_each

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]

Date:	Mon, 2 Dec 2013 16:34:18 +0100
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@...omium.org>,
	"Ma, Xindong" <xindong.ma@...el.com>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
	Sameer Nanda <snanda@...omium.org>,
	Sergey Dyasly <dserrg@...il.com>,
	"Tu, Xiaobing" <xiaobing.tu@...el.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] initial while_each_thread() fixes

On 12/02, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> The lockless while_each_thread() is racy and broken, almost
> every user can loop forever.
> ...
> Another problem with while_each_thread() is that it is very easy
> to use it wrongly, and oom_kill.c is the good example.

Forgot to mention, it is not necessarily safe even under task
list lock if it is used wrongly. Again, oom_kill.c is the good
example, oom_kill_process() does read_lock(&tasklist_lock) but
it doesn't verify that p is still alive.

The new for_each_thread() is much simpler in this respect, it
only needs the stable task_struct.

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/