Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 20 Feb 2006 09:49:11 -0800 | From | "Paul E. McKenney" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] fix kill_proc_info() vs fork() theoretical race |
| |
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 09:19:36PM +0300, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > "Paul E. McKenney" wrote: > > > > On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 12:20:08AM +0300, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > "Paul E. McKenney" wrote: > > > > > > > > The other thing to think through is tkill on a thread/process while it > > > > is being created. I believe that this is OK, since thread-specific > > > > kill must target a specific thread, so does not do the traversal. > > > > > > Also, tkill was not converted to use rcu_read_lock yet, it still > > > takes tasklist_lock, so I think it is safe. > > > > I suspect that tkill will eventually need to avoid tasklist_lock... ;-) > > Ok, I am sending a couple of preparation patches for this. > > Paul, I didn't beleive you when you started this work. Now I think > we can avoid tasklist AND cleanup the code in many places. I am glad > I was wrong.
And I am very glad that you are working this -- you have found some approaches that are much better than those I would have come up with!
> Btw, > > > > firing off some steamroller tests on it. > > Could you point me to these tests?
http://www.rdrop.com/users/paulmck/projects/steamroller/
Contributions of additional tests very welcome!
Thanx, Paul - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |