Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754154AbYKKRRh (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Nov 2008 12:17:37 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751874AbYKKRR2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Nov 2008 12:17:28 -0500 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:50888 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751706AbYKKRR2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Nov 2008 12:17:28 -0500 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:16:59 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Frank Mayhar Cc: Oleg Nesterov , Andrew Morton , Peter Zijlstra , adobriyan@gmail.com, Doug Chapman , Roland McGrath , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] for account_group_exec_runtime(), make sure ->signal can't be freed under rq->lock Message-ID: <20081111171659.GB8201@elte.hu> References: <20081110143930.GA28275@redhat.com> <20081111103532.GA8869@elte.hu> <1226423423.4444.8.camel@bobble.smo.corp.google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1226423423.4444.8.camel@bobble.smo.corp.google.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00,DNS_FROM_SECURITYSAGE autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] 0.0 DNS_FROM_SECURITYSAGE RBL: Envelope sender in blackholes.securitysage.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1403 Lines: 31 * Frank Mayhar wrote: > On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 11:35 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > The patch is ugly, but I don't see the better fix for now. Needs the > > > review from Peter/Ingo. > > this is indeed too ugly, and if we do it we'll get both this ugliness > > and the CPU loop upstream forever. Frank, if you dont have time to fix > > this code, then i guess the best thing is to do the full revert that > > Peter sent. > > Well, at the moment I'm up to my armpits in alligators. That said, > we're going to have to pull in this code regardless, ugliness and > all, since we're guaranteed to run into the soft lockup bug > otherwise. This means that I'll have strong incentive to come back > and readdress the fix to remove the ugliness and address Peter's > concerns. I have no idea when that will be, however. well, we wont leave buggy code in there for .28 - it could trigger anytime on any SMP box, no matter how narrow the race is. I've picked up the spin-wait fix from Oleg, because it fixes the bug. But we should really fix the fundamental issues here too. Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/