lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Jul]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH] exec: Conceal the other threads from wakeups during exec
Eric, I won't comment the intent, but I too do not understand this idea.

On 07/30, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> [This change requires more work to handle TASK_STOPPED and TASK_TRACED]

Yes. And it is not clear to me how can you solve this.

> [This adds a new lock ordering dependency siglock -> pi_lock -> rq_lock ]

Not really, ttwu() can be safely called with siglock held and it takes
pi_lock + rq_lock. Say, signal_wake_up().

> +int make_task_wakekill(struct task_struct *p)
> +{
> + unsigned long flags;
> + int cpu, success = 0;
> + struct rq_flags rf;
> + struct rq *rq;
> + long state;
> +
> + /* Assumes p != current */
> + preempt_disable();
> + /*
> + * If we are going to change a thread waiting for CONDITION we
> + * need to ensure that CONDITION=1 done by the caller can not be
> + * reordered with p->state check below. This pairs with mb() in
> + * set_current_state() the waiting thread does.
> + */
> + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&p->pi_lock, flags);
> + smp_mb__after_spinlock();
> + state = p->state;
> +
> + /* FIXME handle TASK_STOPPED and TASK_TRACED */
> + if ((state == TASK_KILLABLE) ||
> + (state == TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE)) {
> + success = 1;
> + cpu = task_cpu(p);
> + rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
> + rq_lock(rq, &rf);
> + p->state = TASK_WAKEKILL;

You can only do this if the task was already deactivated. Just suppose it
is preempted or does something like

set_current_sate(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);

if (CONDITION) {
// make_task_wakekill() sets state = TASK_WAKEKILL
__set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
return;
}

schedule();

Oleg.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-07-31 08:28    [W:0.105 / U:0.560 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site