[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150623110844.GG24268@pd.tnic>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2015 13:08:44 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@...glemail.com>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/14] notifiers: Assert that RCU is watching in
notify_die
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 10:56:24AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> So I think the theory is that crashes do happen, and that any RCU warning only
> matters to (usually) small race windows.
>
> So by the time a difficult crash truly happens, exactly in that race window, we'd
> have fixed the RCU warning long ago.
>
> I.e. the placement of the RCU warning isn't really relevant in the long run, as it
> should not trigger.
>
> In the short run it's probably more important to have it first, because if we have
> that RCU race then we don't know whether we can trust anything that happens after
> executing the (flawed) notifier chain.
>
> Does that logic make sense to you?
Yap, it does actually. Nice :)
Thanks!
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
--
--
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