Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1227208

single_task_running() vs. preemption warnings (was Re: [PATCH] kvm: fix preemption warnings in kvm_vcpu_block)

From Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject single_task_running() vs. preemption warnings (was Re: [PATCH] kvm: fix preemption warnings in kvm_vcpu_block)
Date 2015-09-17 18:50 +0200
Message-ID <q9KxI-W9-21@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <q9Ken-yZ-25@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw



On 17/09/2015 18:27, Dominik Dingel wrote:
> +			preempt_disable();
> +			solo = single_task_running();
> +			preempt_enable();
> +
>  			cur = ktime_get();
> -		} while (single_task_running() && ktime_before(cur, stop));

That's the obvious way to fix it, but the TOCTTOU problem (which was in
the buggy code too) is obvious too. :)  And the only other user of
single_task_running() in drivers/crypto/mcryptd.c has the same issue.

In fact, because of the way the function is used ("maybe I can do a
little bit of work before going to sleep") it will likely be called many
times in a loop.  This in turn means that:

- any wrong result due to a concurrent process migration would be
rectified very soon

- preempt_disable()/preempt_enable() can actually be just as expensive
or more expensive than single_task_running() itself.

Therefore, I wonder if single_task_running() should just use
raw_smp_processor_id().  At least the TOCTTOU issue can be clearly
documented in the function comment, instead of being hidden behind each
of the callers.

Thanks,

Paolo
--
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/

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

[PATCH] kvm: fix preemption warnings in kvm_vcpu_block Dominik Dingel <dingel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2015-09-17 18:30 +0200
  single_task_running() vs. preemption warnings (was Re: [PATCH] kvm:  fix preemption warnings in kvm_vcpu_block) Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> - 2015-09-17 18:50 +0200
    Re: single_task_running() vs. preemption warnings (was Re: [PATCH]  kvm: fix preemption warnings in kvm_vcpu_block) Dominik Dingel <dingel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2015-09-17 19:10 +0200
      Re: single_task_running() vs. preemption warnings (was Re: [PATCH]  kvm: fix preemption warnings in kvm_vcpu_block) Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> - 2015-09-17 22:50 +0200
        Re: single_task_running() vs. preemption warnings (was Re: [PATCH]  kvm: fix preemption warnings in kvm_vcpu_block) Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2015-09-18 10:00 +0200

csiph-web