mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Esben Nielsen <simlo@phys.au.dk>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
	Daniel Walker <dwalker@mvista.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 0/6] lightweight robust futexes: -V3 - Why in userspace?
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 01:20:18 +0100 (MET)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.4.05.10602170111450.22107-100000@da410> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060216233952.GB12143@elte.hu>

On Fri, 17 Feb 2006, Ingo Molnar wrote:

> 
> * Esben Nielsen <simlo@phys.au.dk> wrote:
> 
> > > this is racy - we cannot know whether the PID wrapped around.
> > >
> > What about adding more bits to check on? The PID to lookup the task_t 
> > and then some extra bits to uniquely identify the actual task.
> 
> which would just be a fancy name for a wider PID space, and would thus 
> still not protect against PID reuse :-)
> 
Can it really be correct there is no way to uniquely identify a thread in
the uptime of the system? It could be done with BigIntegers :-)


> > > nor does this method offer any solution for the case where there are 
> > > already waiters pending: they might be hung forever. 
> >
> > It was for this case I suggested maintaining a list of waiters within 
> > the kernel on each task_t. The adding has to be done FUTEX_WAIT so the 
> > adding operation needs to be protected.
> 
> i'm not sure i follow - what list is this and how would it be 
> maintained?
>

At the FUTEX_WAIT operation add the waiter to a list of waiters on the
owner's task_t. At FUTEX_WAKE remove the waiter. At task exit wake up the
waiters.
 
> > > With our solution 
> > > one of those waiters gets woken up and notice that the lock is dead. 
> > > (and in the unlikely even of that thread dying too while trying to 
> > > recover the data, the kernel will do yet another wakeup, of the next 
> > > waiter.)
> > > 
> > I admit your solution is a good one. The only drawback - besides being 
> > untraditional - is that memory corruption can leave futexes locked at 
> > exit.
> 
> so? Memory corruption can overwrite the futex value anyway, and can thus 
> cause the wrong owner to be identified - causing a locked futex. This 
> patch does not protect against bad effects of memory corruption - 
> there's really no way to keep userspace from breaking itself.
> 

At least you could wake up those who are already blocked in the kernel...

Esben

> 	Ingo
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2006-02-17  0:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-02-16  9:41 [patch 0/6] lightweight robust futexes: -V3 Ingo Molnar
2006-02-16 16:33 ` Daniel Walker
2006-02-16 17:24   ` Ingo Molnar
2006-02-16 17:34     ` Daniel Walker
2006-02-16 19:06       ` [patch 0/6] lightweight robust futexes: -V3 - Why in userspace? Esben Nielsen
2006-02-16 19:34         ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-02-16 20:04           ` Esben Nielsen
2006-02-16 20:17             ` Esben Nielsen
2006-02-16 20:23             ` Christopher Friesen
2006-02-16 20:36             ` Ingo Molnar
2006-02-16 22:32               ` Esben Nielsen
2006-02-16 22:36                 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-02-16 23:20                   ` Esben Nielsen
2006-02-16 23:39                     ` Ingo Molnar
2006-02-17  0:20                       ` Esben Nielsen [this message]
2006-02-17  0:42                         ` Ingo Molnar
2006-02-17 23:47                     ` Andrew James Wade
2006-02-16 20:23       ` [patch 0/6] lightweight robust futexes: -V3 Ingo Molnar
2006-02-16 20:54         ` Daniel Walker
2006-02-16 21:26           ` Ingo Molnar
2006-02-16 21:50             ` Christopher Friesen
2006-02-16 21:55               ` Ingo Molnar
2006-02-16 20:47       ` Paul Jackson
2006-02-16 21:35         ` Ingo Molnar
2006-02-16 21:23 ` Paul Jackson
2006-02-16 21:50   ` Ingo Molnar
2006-02-17  4:56     ` Paul Jackson
2006-02-17  9:41       ` Ingo Molnar
2006-02-17 11:59       ` Ingo Molnar
2006-02-17 20:50         ` Paul Jackson

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=Pine.OSF.4.05.10602170111450.22107-100000@da410 \
    --to=simlo@phys.au.dk \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=arjan@infradead.org \
    --cc=drepper@redhat.com \
    --cc=dwalker@mvista.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®