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]
Date:   Fri, 3 May 2019 09:47:03 +0900
From:   Tetsuo Handa <>
To:     Daniel Vetter <>,
        Intel Graphics Development <>
Cc:     LKML <>,
        Daniel Vetter <>,
        Andrew Morton <>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <>,
        Valdis Kletnieks <>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <>,
        "Liu, Chuansheng" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RFC: hung_task: taint kernel

On 2019/05/03 5:46, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> There's the hung_task_panic sysctl, but that's a bit an extreme measure.
> As a fallback taint at least the machine.
> Our CI uses this to decide when a reboot is necessary, plus to figure
> out whether the kernel is still happy.

Why your CI can't watch for "blocked for more than" message instead of
setting the taint flag? How does your CI decide a reboot is necessary?

There is no need to set the tainted flag when some task was just blocked
for a while. It might be due to memory pressure, it might be due to setting
very short timeout (e.g. a few seconds), it might be due to busy CPUs doing
something else...

Powered by blists - more mailing lists