lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Feb]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Race condition in ptrace
Andrew Morton wrote:
> Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
>>Bodo Stroesser wrote:
>>
>>>Nick Piggin wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Bodo Stroesser wrote:
>>
>>>>I don't see how this could help because AFAIKS, child->saving is only
>>>>set and cleared while the runqueue is locked. And the same runqueue lock
>>>>is taken by wait_task_inactive.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Sorry, that not right. There are some routines called by sched(), that
>>>release
>>>and reacquire the runqueue lock.
>>>
>>
>>Oh yeah, it is the wake_sleeping_dependent / dependent_sleeper crap.
>>Sorry, you are right. And that's definitely a bug in sched.c, because
>>it breaks wait_task_inactive, as you've rightly observed.
>>
>>Andrew, IMO this is another bug to hold 2.6.11 for.
>
>
> Sure. I wouldn't consider Bodo's patch to be the one to use though..

No. Something similar could be done that works on all architectures
and all wait_task_inactive callers (and is confined to sched.c). That
would still be more or less a hack to work around smtnice's unfortunate
locking though.


-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:10    [W:0.066 / U:0.268 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site