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: <20180312142933.GF4043@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Mon, 12 Mar 2018 15:29:33 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc:     Corey Minyard <cminyard@...sta.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: Warning from swake_up_all in 4.14.15-rt13 non-RT

On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 03:11:07PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> I assumed you complained about the unbounded list-walk with interrupts
> disabled (which is cheap but unbound is unbound). So here I suggested I
> move 20 entries off that list a time and enable interrupts again so an
> interrupt could set need_resched.
> But if we get invoked !preemptible then nothing changes.

Right, so any !preemptible invocation of wake_all is bad.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ