linux-kernel - Re: Bug 71331 - mlock yields processor to lower priority process

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: <1395408925.9455.3.camel@linux-fkkt.site>
Date:	Fri, 21 Mar 2014 14:35:25 +0100
From:	Oliver Neukum <oneukum@...e.de>
To:	jimmie.davis@...com.com
Cc:	umgwanakikbuti@...il.com, artem_fetishev@...m.com,
	peterz@...radead.org, kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Bug 71331 - mlock yields processor to lower priority process

On Fri, 2014-03-21 at 12:18 +0000, jimmie.davis@...com.com wrote:
>  
> >How is that different from any other time a task has to yield the CPU
> >for a bit?  While your high priority task is blocked for whatever
> >reason, a lower priority task gets to use the CPU.
> 
>  
> As the submitter of the bug, let me give you my perspective.  SCHED_FIFO means run my task until it blocks or a higher priority task pre-empts it.  Period.
> 
> mlock() doesn't block.  check the man page.

It guarantees that all pages be in RAM. That means it has to read them
in if they aren't. How could it do that without blocking?

	Regards
		Oliver


--
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/