linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] cgroup: replace global percpu_rwsem with signal_struct->group

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: <b0b5766d-e683-41bb-9a8c-00723478d68f@linux.alibaba.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2025 12:30:49 +0800
From: escape <escape@...ux.alibaba.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: hannes@...xchg.org, mkoutny@...e.com, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] cgroup: replace global percpu_rwsem with
 signal_struct->group_rwsem when writing cgroup.procs/threads



在 2025/9/5 11:48, Tejun Heo 写道:
> Hello,
>
> On Fri, Sep 05, 2025 at 11:44:53AM +0800, escape wrote:
> ...
>> To avoid the complexity of runtime changes to favordynmods, perhaps a
>> better approach would be to introduce a separate control variable,
>> configured via a kernel command line parameter such as
>> cgroup_migration_lock=[global|thread_group] to explicitly govern this
>> behavior. What do you think about this approach?
> Can't you just down_write threadgroup_rwsem when flipping the flag? Wouldn't
> that provide sufficient synchronization?
>
> Thanks.
>
You're right, it's clear and simple. I will make the changes in this way.

Thanks.