Hi Rusty,
I was going through the splendidly written document,
"Unreliable Guide to Locking". I thought of something that should be
mentioned in the section "Using Atomic Operations For The Reference
Count" (link : http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/rusty/kernel-locking/x352.html#EXAMPLES-REFCNT-ATOMIC)
I guess, probably the section should also mention that
"
There is one race condition while using atomic_t, which is as follows :
* The refcount of the object is "1".
* Process A tries to perform atomic_dec_and_test(), gets "0" and hence
performs a kfree() on the object.
* Process B tries to perform atomic_inc() on the object.
* It may so happen that the atomic_inc() of Process B is called after
atomic_dec_and_test(), but before the kfree() call, which is a race
condition.
Usually, this race condition is avoided as:
when the last atomic_dec_and_test() (the last == the one which
returns 0) is being called on the object, the object is usually not
accessible to others (list_del()) and hence the simultaneous
atomic_inc() call never occurs.
"
Do you think this race condition should be included in the document?
Thanks,
Kedar.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |