"Eric W. Biederman" wrote:
>
> Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > Some questions.
> >
> > first_tgid:
> > ...
> > for (; pos && pid_alive(pos); pos = next_task(pos))
> >
> > I think this patch makes this 'pid_alive(pos)' unneeded?
>
> Close. The problem is that we could have slept with the
> count elevated on start before we do rcu_read_lock().
Yes, we could have slept. But (unlike next_tgid) this loop
starts from pos=init_task or from pos=find_task_by_pid()
and we are doing find_task_by_pid under rcu_read_lock() ?
Oleg.
-
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]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
