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: Tue, 11 Jun 2019 15:13:59 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> To: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>, huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@...il.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 16/19] locking/rwsem: Guard against making count negative On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 04:59:15PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > static struct rw_semaphore __sched * > +rwsem_down_read_slowpath(struct rw_semaphore *sem, int state, long adjustment) > { > + long count; > bool wake = false; > struct rwsem_waiter waiter; > DEFINE_WAKE_Q(wake_q); > > + if (unlikely(!adjustment)) { > + /* > + * This shouldn't happen. If it does, there is probably > + * something wrong in the system. > + */ > + WARN_ON_ONCE(1); if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!adjustment)) { > + > + /* > + * An adjustment of 0 means that there are too many readers > + * holding or trying to acquire the lock. So disable > + * optimistic spinning and go directly into the wait list. > + */ > + if (rwsem_test_oflags(sem, RWSEM_RD_NONSPINNABLE)) > + rwsem_set_nonspinnable(sem); ISTR rwsem_set_nonspinnable() already does that test, so no need to do it again, right? > + goto queue; > + } > + > /* > * Save the current read-owner of rwsem, if available, and the > * reader nonspinnable bit.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists