linux-kernel - Re: [patch-rt v2] rtmutex: Fix lock stealing logic

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20170623101455.2501f004@gandalf.local.home>
Date:   Fri, 23 Jun 2017 10:14:55 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
Cc:     Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch-rt v2] rtmutex: Fix lock stealing logic

On Fri, 23 Jun 2017 16:07:19 +0200
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de> wrote:

> On Fri, 2017-06-23 at 09:33 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >  				  struct task_struct *task,  
> > > @@ -886,20 +901,16 @@ static int __try_to_take_rt_mutex(struct
> > >  	 */
> > >  	if (waiter) {
> > >  		/*
> > > -		 * If waiter is not the highest priority waiter of
> > > -		 * @lock, give up.
> > > +		 * If waiter is not the highest priority waiter of @lock,
> > > +		 * or its peer when lateral steal is allowed, give up.
> > >  		 */
> > > -		if (waiter != rt_mutex_top_waiter(lock)) {
> > > -			/* XXX rt_mutex_waiter_less() ? */
> > > +		if (!rt_mutex_steal(lock, waiter, mode))
> > >  			return 0;
> > > -		}
> > > -
> > >  		/*
> > >  		 * We can acquire the lock. Remove the waiter from the
> > >  		 * lock waiters tree.
> > >  		 */
> > >  		rt_mutex_dequeue(lock, waiter);
> > > -  
> > 
> > I liked that space.  
> 
> I like minus signs in diffstat, that one was a freebee.  Maintainers
> can revive it if they like, or I can post a V3 with it revived as well
> as s/rt_mutex_steal/rt_mutex_claim.
>

It's not bigly to me.

-- Steve