linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] mm/vmscan: fix infinite loop in drop_slab

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: <20200909214912.GO6583@casper.infradead.org>
Date:   Wed, 9 Sep 2020 22:49:12 +0100
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To:     Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Cc:     zangchunxin@...edance.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm/vmscan: fix infinite loop in drop_slab_node

On Wed, Sep 09, 2020 at 07:59:44PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> - Exit also on other signals such as SIGABRT, SIGTERM? If I write to drop_caches
> and think it's too long, I would prefer to kill it by ctrl-c and not just kill
> -9. Dunno if the canonical way of testing for this is if
> (signal_pending(current)) or differently.

fatal_signal_pending() is the canonical way to do it.  If your task has
installed a signal handler for ABRT or TERM, that's its prerogative,
but it's chosen not to get killed, and it's not allowed to see short
reads/writes, so we can't break out early.