linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v3 1/3] workqueue: Hold wq_pool_mutex while affining tasks to wq_unbound

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: <Yvrb3hfZuUzSpX5e@slm.duckdns.org>
Date:   Mon, 15 Aug 2022 13:50:54 -1000
From:   Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:     Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>
Cc:     Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>,
        Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 1/3] workqueue: Hold wq_pool_mutex while affining
 tasks to wq_unbound_cpumask

On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 11:40:28AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> From df7b4672db4dfd3e480b1873b9d346e8a7dfc69f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshan.ljs@...group.com>
> Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2022 10:52:04 +0800
> Subject: [PATCH] workqueue: Protects wq_unbound_cpumask with
>  wq_pool_attach_mutex
> 
> When unbind_workers() reads wq_unbound_cpumask to set the affinity of
> freshly-unbound kworkers, it only holds wq_pool_attach_mutex. This isn't
> sufficient as wq_unbound_cpumask is only protected by wq_pool_mutex.
> 
> Make wq_unbound_cpumask protected with wq_pool_attach_mutex and also
> remove the need of temporary saved_cpumask.
> 
> Fixes: 10a5a651e3af ("workqueue: Restrict kworker in the offline CPU pool running on housekeeping CPUs")
> Reported-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshan.ljs@...group.com>

This patch looks fine to me but is whitespace corrupted (two leading spaces
on all context lines). Can you please resend?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun