linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] workqueue: Make create_worker() safe against spurious wakeups

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAJhGHyDfRGOS0v8vA7Lf+W2K80r2_+CndFBz9O-HXd6AtrexQA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 4 Aug 2022 18:19:08 +0800
From:   Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>
To:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc:     Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] workqueue: Make create_worker() safe against spurious wakeups

On Thu, Aug 4, 2022 at 4:57 PM Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com> wrote:
         ;
>
> There might be some wakeups from wake_up_worker() since it is in
> the idle list.  These wakeups will be "spurious wakeups" in the view
> of the completion subsystem.
>


Oh, sorry, I was wrong. "complete(&worker->ready_to_start);" and
"worker_enter_idle(worker);" are in the same pool lock region.

There are no "spurious wakeups" from "wake_up_worker()" as I have
wrongly described.