lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Feb]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
Subject[PATCH 7/8] um: Should hold tasklist_lock while traversing processes
Traversing the tasks requires holding tasklist_lock, otherwise it
is unsafe.

Signed-off-by: Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@linaro.org>
---

p.s. However, I'm not sure that calling os_kill_ptraced_process()
in the 'atomic' context is correct. It seem to work, but please
take a closer look.

arch/um/kernel/reboot.c | 3 +++
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/um/kernel/reboot.c b/arch/um/kernel/reboot.c
index 4d93dff..66d754c 100644
--- a/arch/um/kernel/reboot.c
+++ b/arch/um/kernel/reboot.c
@@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
*/

#include "linux/sched.h"
+#include "linux/spinlock.h"
#include "linux/slab.h"
#include "kern_util.h"
#include "os.h"
@@ -22,6 +23,7 @@ static void kill_off_processes(void)
struct task_struct *p;
int pid;

+ read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
for_each_process(p) {
if (p->mm == NULL)
continue;
@@ -29,6 +31,7 @@ static void kill_off_processes(void)
pid = p->mm->context.id.u.pid;
os_kill_ptraced_process(pid, 1);
}
+ read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
}
}

--
1.7.7.6


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-02-07 07:53    [from the cache]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and my Meterkast|Read the blog