linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] completion: move blk_wait

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: <ZiEyLvL6Pq_RB-Eh@infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 07:46:06 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Mike Snitzer <msnitzer@...hat.com>,
	Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
	Guangwu Zhang <guazhang@...hat.com>, dm-devel@...ts.linux.dev,
	linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] completion: move blk_wait_io to
 kernel/sched/completion.c

On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 08:30:14AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> It certainly is a hack/work-around, but unless there are a lot more that
> should be using something like this, I don't think adding extra core
> complexity in terms of a special task state (or per-task flag, at least
> that would be easier) is really warranted.

Basically any kernel thread doing on-demand work has the same problem.
It just has an easier workaround hack, as the kernel threads can simply
claim to do an interruptible sleep to not trigger the softlockup
warnings.