linux-kernel - Re: [patch 10/20] cpu/hotplug: Make target state writeable

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: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1602281545140.3638@nanos>
Date:	Sun, 28 Feb 2016 15:49:33 +0100 (CET)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa@....edu>,
	Sebastian Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
	Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 10/20] cpu/hotplug: Make target state writeable

Rafael,

On Sat, 27 Feb 2016, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Say we've taken all of them offline and now we are ready to eject.  If an
> online from sysfs (or any other place) comes in at this point, we'll be
> ejecting a CPU that's potentially doing something which is not awesome.
> 
> That's why we have device_hotplug_lock and some ugly code related to it.
> 
> It extends to parents and children somewhat because of device objects
> representing packages (we want those to be "offline" only if all their
> children are offline) and that's why the lock is held around offline from
> sysfs too.
> 
> I'm not entirely happy with this for quite obvious reasons, but it gets
> the job done ATM.

Understood. I'll fix that thing up so that won't happen and I put it on the
list of things to look at deeper.

Thanks,

	tglx