linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv4 01/17] zram: switch to non-atomic entry locking

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: <20250131145536.d7a0483331b0ebfde80a5754@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2025 14:55:36 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 01/17] zram: switch to non-atomic entry locking

On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 18:06:00 +0900 Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org> wrote:

> +static void zram_slot_write_lock(struct zram *zram, u32 index)
> +{
> +	atomic_t *lock = &zram->table[index].lock;
> +	int old = atomic_read(lock);
> +
> +	do {
> +		if (old != ZRAM_ENTRY_UNLOCKED) {
> +			cond_resched();
> +			old = atomic_read(lock);
> +			continue;
> +		}
> +	} while (!atomic_try_cmpxchg(lock, &old, ZRAM_ENTRY_WRLOCKED));
> +}

I expect that if the calling userspace process has realtime policy (eg
SCHED_FIFO) then the cond_resched() won't schedule SCHED_NORMAL tasks
and this becomes a busy loop.  And if the machine is single-CPU, the
loop is infinite.

I do agree that for inventing new locking schemes, the bar is set
really high.