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: Mon, 1 Jun 2015 10:24:23 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> To: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com> Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, ktkhai@...allels.com Subject: Re: sched_setscheduler() vs idle_balance() race On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 08:39:04AM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > I don't see why we can't just say no in can_migrate_task() if ->pi_lock > is held. I suppose we could do that; what I really want to avoid is also requiring pi_lock for scheduling. The down-side of looking at pi_lock for migration is that there is no common point for migrating tasks, its all inside the classes, so we'd get to sprinkle it all over the place. -- 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