[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1496318134.2790.18.camel@codethink.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2017 12:55:34 +0100
From: Ben Hutchings <ben.hutchings@...ethink.co.uk>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
Vovo Yang <vovoy@...gle.com>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.4 040/103] pid_ns: Sleep in TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE in
zap_pid_ns_processes
On Tue, 2017-05-23 at 22:09 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> 4.4-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
>
> ------------------
>
> From: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
>
> commit b9a985db98961ae1ba0be169f19df1c567e4ffe0 upstream.
>
> The code can potentially sleep for an indefinite amount of time in
> zap_pid_ns_processes triggering the hung task timeout, and increasing
> the system average. This is undesirable. Sleep with a task state of
> TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE instead of TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE to remove these
> undesirable side effects.
[...]
This seems to rely on the task not actually being signallable due to the
PF_EXITING flag. Using TASK_IDLE would be clearer (though less
backport-able).
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
Software Developer, Codethink Ltd.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists