Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2011 09:50:26 +0200 From: Manuel Lauss <manuel.lauss@...glemail.com> To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> Cc: Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>, Marc Zyngier <maz@...terjones.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, "Paul E. McKenney" <paul.mckenney@...aro.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] shm: fix a race between shm_exit() and shm_init() On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 9:43 AM, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 2:45 AM, Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com> wrote: >> >> From: Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com> >> Subject: [PATCH] shm: fix a race between shm_exit() and shm_init() > > This patch is disgusting. > > Doing things like this: > >> + /* >> + * For init_ipc_ns shm_ids().rw_mutex is statically initialized >> + * as kernel threads should be able to use it in do_exit() before >> + * shm_init(), which is called on do_initcall() >> + */ >> + if (ns == &init_ipc_ns) >> + __ipc_init_ids(&shm_ids(ns)); >> + else >> + ipc_init_ids(&shm_ids(ns)); > > should have told you that there is something totally wrong with your patch. > > I'd prefer to really do the initialization in the allocator (at which > point it would be very natural to do the initialization statically for > a static allocation, and you wouldn't have the above kind of nasty > conditional stuff), but that whole namespace initialization and setup > just looks pretty nasty. > > Looking at some of the other cases like net_ns_init(), maybe the > proper fix is to just make 'ipc_ns_init()' be a pure_initcall(). > > Does the attached patch work? No, same oops still. Manuel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.