linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 03/11] locking, rwsem: introduce basis for down_write

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: <20160331084412.GF3430@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:	Thu, 31 Mar 2016 10:44:12 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Chris Zankel <chris@...kel.net>,
	Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@...il.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
	sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, linux-xtensa@...ux-xtensa.org,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/11] locking, rwsem: introduce basis for
 down_write_killable

On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 10:33:36AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > __mutex_lock_common() has it before the call to schedule and after the
> > 'trylock'.
> > 
> > The difference is that rwsem will now respond to the KILL and return
> > -EINTR even if the lock is available, whereas mutex will acquire it and
> > ignore the signal (for a little while longer).
> > 
> > Neither is wrong per se, but I feel all the locking primitives should
> > behave in a consistent manner in this regard.
> 
> Agreed! What about the following on top? I will repost the full patch
> if it looks OK.

Yep, that seems to have the right shape to it.

Thanks!