[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <28405360-ea08-acdd-d62b-b925c9904dff@google.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2022 16:31:05 -0500
From: Barret Rhoden <brho@...gle.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alexey Gladkov <legion@...nel.org>,
William Cohen <wcohen@...hat.com>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
Chris Hyser <chris.hyser@...cle.com>,
Peter Collingbourne <pcc@...gle.com>,
Xiaofeng Cao <caoxiaofeng@...ong.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rlimits: do not grab tasklist_lock for do_prlimit on
current
On 12/15/21 14:42, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> In update_rlimit_cpu use lock_task_sighand instead of unconditionally
> grabbing sighand->siglock (because without tasklist_lock sighand might
> be NULL).
this ended up being a minor complication, since update_rlimit_cpu()
could fail if the task was exiting, but i think i sorted it out.
i'll send out revised patchset shortly with this change, including
making do_prlimit() static.
thanks,
barret
Powered by blists - more mailing lists