Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 12:46:18 -0400 From: Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org> To: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, trasz@freebsd.org, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r220526 - head/sys/kern Message-ID: <BANLkTimCUKTnkNMtbgpi%2Bt6%2BfyYPKc5uEw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20110415082706.GI48734@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> References: <201104101707.p3AH736T054347@svn.freebsd.org> <201104141713.28311.jhb@freebsd.org> <20110415082706.GI48734@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
2011/4/15 Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>: > On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 05:13:28PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: >> On Sunday, April 10, 2011 1:07:03 pm Konstantin Belousov wrote: >> > Author: kib >> > Date: Sun Apr 10 17:07:02 2011 >> > New Revision: 220526 >> > URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/220526 >> > >> > Log: >> > Some callers of proc_reparent() already have the parent process locked. >> > Detect the situation and avoid process lock recursion. >> > >> > Reported by: Fabian Keil <freebsd-listen fabiankeil de> >> > >> > Modified: >> > head/sys/kern/kern_exit.c >> >> Can we instead assert it is always held and fix callers that don't? Using >> locked variables is messy and I'd rather avoid it when possible. We already >> require the caller to hold other locks for this operation. >> > I agree that this is ugly, and proper fix probably would be something else. > E.g. struct proc could grow another field that holds a pointer to the ucred > it is accounted for, and locked with some global lock. As you already hold allproc_lock the process can't be distructed, then as I already pointed out to Tomasz, it should alright to just bump the refcount for cred and pass down, I guess. Attilio -- Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einsteinhelp
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BANLkTimCUKTnkNMtbgpi%2Bt6%2BfyYPKc5uEw>