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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2017 09:26:35 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> cc: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> Subject: Re: Crashes in perf_event_ctx_lock_nested On Wed, 1 Nov 2017, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 10:32:00PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > That means we can have the following situation: > > > > lock(watchdog_mutex); > > lockup_detector_reconfigure(); > > cpus_read_lock(); > > stop(); > > park() > > update(); > > start(); > > unpark() > > cpus_read_unlock(); thread runs() > > cleanup(); > > unlock(watchdog_mutex); > > > > Isn't there also a where hardlockup_detector_perf_init() creates an > event to 'probe' stuff, and then hardlockup_detector_perf_enable() > _again_ creates the event? probe() releases the event.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists