From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Salman <sqazi@google.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
peterz@infradead.org, akpm@inux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tytso@google.com,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix a race in pid generation that causes pids to be reused immediately.
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2010 08:39:00 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1006090830560.4506@i5.linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100609094850.GA23292@elte.hu>
On Wed, 9 Jun 2010, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Salman <sqazi@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > A program that repeatedly forks and waits is susceptible to having the
> > same pid repeated, especially when it competes with another instance of the
> > same program. This is really bad for bash implementation. Furthermore, many shell
> > scripts assume that pid numbers will not be used for some length of time.
> >
> > Thanks to Ted Tso for the key ideas of this implementation.
>
> Looks rather interesting. (Cleanliness-wise i'd suggest to split out the while
> loop into a helper function.)
I have to say that usually I can look at a patch and see what it does.
This time I had absolutely no clue.
There was a whole big context missing: that original load of "last_pid"
into "last" at the top of the function, far outside the patch. And in
this case I don't think splitting out the trivial cmpxchg() loop would
help that problem - that would just make the "load original" part of the
big picture be even further away from the final "replace if same" part,
and I think _that_ is a much more critical part of the subtleties there.
So I had to read the patch _and_ go read the code it patched, in order to
at all understand what it did. I think the patch explanation should have
done it, and I also think this would need a bit comment at the top.
[ In fact, I'd argue that the _old_ code would have needed a big comment
at the top about last_pid usage, but i somebody had done that, they'd
probably also have seen the race while explaning how the code worked ;]
So having looked at the patch and the code, I agree with the patch, but
I'd like some more explanation to go with it.
[ Or Ted's version: as mentioned, I don't think the complexity is actually
in the final cmpxchg loop itself, but in the bigger picture, so I don't
think the differences between Ted's and Salman's versions are that big ]
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-06-09 15:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-06-09 6:24 Salman
2010-06-09 6:53 ` Andi Kleen
2010-06-09 9:48 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-06-09 15:39 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2010-06-09 15:50 ` tytso
2010-06-09 16:06 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-06-09 17:10 ` tytso
2010-06-09 17:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-06-09 17:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-06-09 17:34 ` tytso
2010-06-09 17:43 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-06-09 17:47 ` tytso
2010-06-09 18:09 ` Salman Qazi
2010-06-09 11:49 ` Michel Lespinasse
2010-06-09 12:37 ` tytso
2010-06-09 12:17 ` tytso
2010-06-09 21:00 Salman
2010-06-09 21:21 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-06-09 21:33 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-09 22:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-06-09 22:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-06-10 0:08 ` Salman Qazi
2010-06-10 0:20 ` Linus Torvalds
[not found] ` <AANLkTilXJ0X2qxD9cNTlLayKzySEZu1HEZUWu--Go8kw@mail.gmail.com>
2010-06-10 5:55 ` Salman Qazi
2010-06-10 16:39 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-06-10 20:09 Salman
2010-06-10 20:38 ` tytso
2010-06-10 21:04 ` Salman Qazi
2010-06-10 21:24 Salman
2010-06-11 17:17 Salman
2010-06-11 17:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-06-11 22:49 ` Salman
2010-06-11 23:07 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-06-14 23:58 ` Andrew Morton
2010-06-15 0:56 ` tytso
2010-06-15 1:55 ` Andrew Morton
2010-06-15 3:26 ` Paul Mackerras
2010-06-15 4:21 ` Andrew Morton
2010-06-15 4:38 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-06-15 6:57 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2010-06-15 7:25 ` Paul Mackerras
2010-06-15 12:56 ` tytso
2010-06-15 13:06 ` Kyle McMartin
2010-06-15 14:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-15 19:37 ` Andrew Morton
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=alpine.LFD.2.00.1006090830560.4506@i5.linux-foundation.org \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=akpm@inux-foundation.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sqazi@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tytso@google.com \
/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
Powered by JetHome