lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jun]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] posix-cpu-timers: remove tasklist_lock where we can
On 06/12, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote:
>
> tasklist_lock is not needed to protect find_task_by_vpid() nor
> thread_group_leader()

It does protect thread_group_leader(), unless we use current.
Please see below.

> @@ -398,7 +398,7 @@ int posix_cpu_timer_create(struct k_itimer *new_timer)
> new_timer->it.cpu.incr.sched = 0;
> new_timer->it.cpu.expires.sched = 0;
>
> - read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
> + rcu_read_lock();
> if (CPUCLOCK_PERTHREAD(new_timer->it_clock)) {
> if (pid == 0) {
> p = current;
> @@ -422,7 +422,7 @@ int posix_cpu_timer_create(struct k_itimer *new_timer)
> } else {
> ret = -EINVAL;
> }
> - read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
> + rcu_read_unlock();

Suppose that the non-main thread execs. de_thread() does

attach_pid(tsk, PIDTYPE_PID, task_pid(leader));
leader->group_leader = tsk;

under write_lock(tasklist). This means posix_cpu_timer_create() can return
-EINVAL if it is called in between, or if we found the group leader but
thread_group_leader() is called after "tsk->group_leader = tsk".

I think the patch is fine, but you should also replace thread_group_leader()
with has_group_leader_pid().



This reminds me. !CPUCLOCK_PERTHREAD timers survive after exec, but only
if ->group_leader execs. Not good.

Oleg.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-06-12 16:09    [W:0.333 / U:0.268 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site