lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Dec]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [patch 7/9] signals: Fix more rcu assumptions
Date
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:

> > Perhaps it is better to modify __sigqueue_alloc() instead? It can take
> > rcu_lock() around cred->user itself.
>
> Indeed. Was too tired to see the obvious :)

Ah, but... If __sigqueue_alloc() is called from sigqueue_alloc(), then you
don't need the RCU read lock as the target task is current.

So perhaps the callsite for __sigqueue_alloc() in __send_signal()? That at
least puts the rcu_read_lock() call in proximity to the function that actually
needs it.

David


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-12-11 15:03    [W:0.075 / U:1.704 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site