Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]> writes:
> On 04/10, Roland McGrath wrote:
>>
>> I would be inclined to restructure the inner loop something like this:
>>
>> p = g;
>> while (unlikely(p->mm == NULL)) {
>> p = next_thread(p);
>> if (p == g)
>> break;
>> }
>> if (p->mm == mm) {
>> /*
>> * p->sighand can't disappear, but
>> * may be changed by de_thread()
>> */
>> lock_task_sighand(p, &flags);
>> zap_process(p);
>> unlock_task_sighand(p, &flags);
>> }
>
> Yes, I agree, this is much more understandable.
There is one piece of zap_threads that still makes me uncomfortable.
task_lock is used to protect p->mm.
Therefore killing a process based upon p->mm == mm is racy
with respect to sys_unshare I believe if we don't take
task_lock.
Eric
-
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]
