On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 08:19:59PM +0400, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >On 04/02, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> >>
> >>In this patch I leave mm->exe_file lockless.
> >>After exec/fork we can change it only for current task and only if mm->mm_users == 1.
> >>
> >>something like this:
> >>
> >>task_lock(current);
> >
> >OK, this protects against the race with get_task_mm()
> >
> >>if (atomic_read(¤t->mm->mm_users) == 1)
> >
> >this means PR_SET_MM_EXE_FILE can fail simply because someone did
> >get_task_mm(). Or the caller is multithreaded.
>
> This is sad, seems like we should keep mm->exe_file protection by mm->mmap_sem.
> So, I'll rework this patch...
Ah, it's about locking. I misundertand it at first.
Oleg, forget about my email then.
Cyrill
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx"> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
[Site Home]
[Linux ARM Kernel]
[Linux ARM]
[Linux Omap]
[Fedora ARM]
[IETF Annouce]
[Security]
[Bugtraq]
[Linux]
[Linux OMAP]
[Linux MIPS]
[ECOS]
[Tools]
[DDR & Rambus]
[Asterisk Internet PBX]
[Linux API]
[Monitors]