linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 09/16] kgr: mark task

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: <20140501142414.GA31611@htj.dyndns.org>
Date:	Thu, 1 May 2014 10:24:14 -0400
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jirislaby@...il.com,
	Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@...e.cz>, Michael Matz <matz@...e.de>,
	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
	Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 09/16] kgr: mark task_safe in some kthreads

On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 04:30:42PM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> Some threads do not use kthread_should_stop. Before we enable a

Haven't really following kgraft development but is it safe to assume
that all kthread_should_stop() usages are clean side-effect-less
boundaries?  If so, why is that property guaranteed?  Is there any
mechanism for sanity checks?  Maybe I'm just failing to understand how
the whole thing is supposed to work but this looks like it could
devolve into something more broken than the freezer which we haven't
fully recovered from yet.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/