[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141017213440.GA32576@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 23:34:40 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Kirill Tkhai <tkhai@...dex.ru>
Cc: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@...allels.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@...allels.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] sched: Revert delayed_put_task_struct() and fix
use after free
On 10/16, Kirill Tkhai wrote:
>
> Cool! Elegant fix. We set PF_EXITING in exit_signals(), which is earlier
> than release_task() is called.
OK, thanks, I am sending the patch...
> Shouldn't we use smp_rmb/smp_wmb here?
No, we do not. call_rcu(delayed_put_pid) itself implies the barrier on
all CPUs. IOW, by the time RCU actually calls delayed_put_pid() every
CPU must see all memory changes which were done before call_rcu() was
called. And otoh, all rcu-read-lock critical sections which could miss
PF_EXITING should be already finished.
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