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
>
next prev parent 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®