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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2014 16:19:25 +0900 From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...not-panic.com> Cc: gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, dmitry.torokhov@...il.com, falcon@...zu.com, tiwai@...e.de, arjan@...ux.intel.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, oleg@...hat.com, hare@...e.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp, joseph.salisbury@...onical.com, bpoirier@...e.de, santosh@...lsio.com, "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...e.com>, Kay Sievers <kay@...y.org>, One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Tim Gardner <tim.gardner@...onical.com>, Pierre Fersing <pierre-fersing@...rref.org>, Nagalakshmi Nandigama <nagalakshmi.nandigama@...gotech.com>, Praveen Krishnamoorthy <praveen.krishnamoorthy@...gotech.com>, Sreekanth Reddy <sreekanth.reddy@...gotech.com>, Abhijit Mahajan <abhijit.mahajan@...gotech.com>, Casey Leedom <leedom@...lsio.com>, Hariprasad S <hariprasad@...lsio.com>, MPT-FusionLinux.pdl@...gotech.com, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC v2 3/6] kthread: warn on kill signal if not OOM On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 11:37:24PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: ... > + /* > + * I got SIGKILL, but wait for 60 more seconds for completion > + * unless chosen by the OOM killer. This delay is there as a > + * workaround for boot failure caused by SIGKILL upon device > + * driver initialization timeout. > + * > + * N.B. this will actually let the thread complete regularly, > + * wait_for_completion() will be used eventually, the 60 second > + * try here is just to check for the OOM over that time. > + */ > + WARN_ONCE(!test_thread_flag(TIF_MEMDIE), > + "Got SIGKILL but not from OOM, if this issue is on probe use .driver.async_probe\n"); > + for (i = 0; i < 60 && !test_thread_flag(TIF_MEMDIE); i++) > + if (wait_for_completion_timeout(&done, HZ)) > + goto wait_done; > + Ugh... Jesus, this is way too hacky, so now we fail on 90s timeout instead of 30? Why do we even need this with the proposed async probing changes? 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists