linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] futex: check PF_KTHREAD rather than !p->mm to filter out kthreads

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: <20150214215423.GA18200@redhat.com>
Date:	Sat, 14 Feb 2015 22:54:23 +0100
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
Cc:	Darren Hart <darren@...art.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@...hat.com>,
	Larry Woodman <lwoodman@...hat.com>,
	Mateusz Guzik <mguzik@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] futex: check PF_KTHREAD rather than !p->mm to
	filter out kthreads

On 02/14, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2015-02-14 at 21:57 +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > Perhaps... but PF_KTHREAD looks self-documented too ;)
>
> Well the idea was to standardize how we check for a kthreads, as opposed
> to improving readability or such. Just a suggestion.

I understand, and of course I won't argue if you add a helper.

I meant that checking for a kthread is already standardized: flags & PF_KTREAD.
Not sure this needs a helper, but I again I won't argue.

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/