linux-kernel - [PATCH 0/2] hung_task: improve rcu_lock

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: <20150317192450.GA32579@redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 17 Mar 2015 20:24:50 +0100
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@...hat.com>
Cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, rientjes@...gle.com,
	dwysocha@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 0/2] hung_task: improve rcu_lock_break() logic

On 03/17, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> On 03/17, Aaron Tomlin wrote:
> >
> > --- a/kernel/hung_task.c
> > +++ b/kernel/hung_task.c
> > @@ -169,7 +169,7 @@ static void check_hung_uninterruptible_tasks(unsigned long timeout)
> >  		return;
> >
> >  	rcu_read_lock();
> > -	do_each_thread(g, t) {
> > +	for_each_process_thread(g, t) {
> >  		if (!max_count--)
> >  			goto unlock;
> >  		if (!--batch_count) {
> > @@ -180,7 +180,7 @@ static void check_hung_uninterruptible_tasks(unsigned long timeout)
> >  		/* use "==" to skip the TASK_KILLABLE tasks waiting on NFS */
> >  		if (t->state == TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE)
> >  			check_hung_task(t, timeout);
> > -	} while_each_thread(g, t);
> > +	}
>
>
> Acked-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
>
>
>
> Perhaps it also makes sense to improve this rcu_lock_break a bit...
> For example, if 't' is dead but 'g' is alive we can continue the
> "for_each_process" part of this double loop. And if 't' is still
> alive then we can find the new leader and continue...
>
> But I agree, lets start from this fix, then we will see.

Something like this. on top of Aaron's change.

But actually I am not sure this really makes a lot of sense. But if
yes, we can do more. We can save g->start_time before rcu_lock_break(),
and then "both dead" case can use for_each_process() to (try to) find
the first process whis has a ge start_time.

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/