lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Aug]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Possible race between cgroup_attach_proc and de_thread, and questionable code in de_thread.
On 07/28, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 11:08:13AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> >
> > I disagree. It also requires - by virtue of the use of while_each_thread() -
> > that 'g' remains on the list that 't' is walking along.
>
> Doesn't the following code in the loop body deal with this possibilty?
>
> /* Exit if t or g was unhashed during refresh. */
> if (t->state == TASK_DEAD || g->state == TASK_DEAD)
> goto unlock;

This code is completely wrong even if while_each_thread() was fine.

I sent the patch but it was ignored.

[PATCH] fix the racy check_hung_uninterruptible_tasks()->rcu_lock_break()
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127688790019041

Oleg.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-08-14 19:57    [W:6.534 / U:0.000 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site