linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 01/26] rculist: introduce list_next_or_null_rr

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: <CA+55aFymFCVqh4VxtqDPoFYh6zsGEDLSV79_AnsMp3M=t2mhqg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 21 May 2018 08:16:59 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Roman Pen <roman.penyaev@...fitbricks.com>
Cc:     Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        linux-block <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-rdma <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
        Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...disk.com>,
        Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
        Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
        swapnil.ingle@...fitbricks.com, danil.kipnis@...fitbricks.com,
        Jinpu Wang <jinpu.wang@...fitbricks.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/26] rculist: introduce list_next_or_null_rr_rcu()

On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 6:51 AM Roman Penyaev <
roman.penyaev@...fitbricks.com> wrote:

> No, I continue from the pointer, which I assigned on the previous IO
> in order to send IO fairly and keep load balanced.

Right. And that's exactly what has both me and Paul nervous. You're no
longer in the RCU domain. You're using a pointer where the lifetime has
nothing to do with RCU any more.

Can it be done? Sure. But you need *other* locking for it (that you haven't
explained), and it's fragile as hell.

It's probably best to not use RCU for it at all, but depend on that "other
locking" that you have to have anyway, to keep the pointer valid over the
non-RCU region.

                Linus