linux-kernel - Re: mm: deadlock between get_online_cpus/pcpu

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.2.20.1702080906540.3955@east.gentwo.org>
Date:   Wed, 8 Feb 2017 09:11:06 -0600 (CST)
From:   Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        syzkaller <syzkaller@...glegroups.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: mm: deadlock between get_online_cpus/pcpu_alloc

On Wed, 8 Feb 2017, Michal Hocko wrote:

> > Huch? stop_machine() is horrible and heavy weight. Don't go there, there
> > must be simpler solutions than that.
>
> Absolutely agreed. We are in the page allocator path so using the
> stop_machine* is just ridiculous. And, in fact, there is a much simpler
> solution [1]

That is nonsense. stop_machine would be used when adding removing a
processor. There would be no need to synchronize when looping over active
cpus anymore. get_online_cpus() etc would be removed from the hot
path since the cpu masks are guaranteed to be stable.