On Sun, 23 Nov 2014 19:23:53 +0100 Manfred Spraul
wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH] ipc/sem.c: Fully initialize sem_array before making it
> visible
>
> ipc_addid() makes a new ipc identifier visible to everyone.
> New objects start as locked, so that the caller can complete
> the initialization
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 01:36:51PM -0800, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Sun, 2014-11-23 at 16:03 -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > On 11/23/2014 01:23 PM, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> > > Hi Rik,
> > >
> > > On 11/21/2014 08:52 PM, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > >> When manipulating just one semaphore with semop,
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 01:36:51PM -0800, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
On Sun, 2014-11-23 at 16:03 -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:
On 11/23/2014 01:23 PM, Manfred Spraul wrote:
Hi Rik,
On 11/21/2014 08:52 PM, Rik van Riel wrote:
When manipulating just one semaphore with semop, sem_lock only
On Sun, 23 Nov 2014 19:23:53 +0100 Manfred Spraul manf...@colorfullife.com
wrote:
Subject: [PATCH] ipc/sem.c: Fully initialize sem_array before making it
visible
ipc_addid() makes a new ipc identifier visible to everyone.
New objects start as locked, so that the caller can complete
the
On Sun, 2014-11-23 at 16:03 -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On 11/23/2014 01:23 PM, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> > Hi Rik,
> >
> > On 11/21/2014 08:52 PM, Rik van Riel wrote:
> >> When manipulating just one semaphore with semop, sem_lock only
> >> takes that single semaphore's lock. This creates a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/23/2014 01:23 PM, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> Hi Rik,
>
> On 11/21/2014 08:52 PM, Rik van Riel wrote:
>> When manipulating just one semaphore with semop, sem_lock only
>> takes that single semaphore's lock. This creates a problem during
>>
Hi Rik,
On 11/21/2014 08:52 PM, Rik van Riel wrote:
When manipulating just one semaphore with semop, sem_lock only takes that
single semaphore's lock. This creates a problem during initialization of
the semaphore array, when the data structures used by sem_lock have not
been set up yet. The
Hi Rik,
On 11/21/2014 08:52 PM, Rik van Riel wrote:
When manipulating just one semaphore with semop, sem_lock only takes that
single semaphore's lock. This creates a problem during initialization of
the semaphore array, when the data structures used by sem_lock have not
been set up yet. The
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/23/2014 01:23 PM, Manfred Spraul wrote:
Hi Rik,
On 11/21/2014 08:52 PM, Rik van Riel wrote:
When manipulating just one semaphore with semop, sem_lock only
takes that single semaphore's lock. This creates a problem during
initialization of
On Sun, 2014-11-23 at 16:03 -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:
On 11/23/2014 01:23 PM, Manfred Spraul wrote:
Hi Rik,
On 11/21/2014 08:52 PM, Rik van Riel wrote:
When manipulating just one semaphore with semop, sem_lock only
takes that single semaphore's lock. This creates a problem during
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/22/2014 02:14 PM, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> On 11/21/2014 09:29 PM, Rik van Riel wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 11/21/2014 03:09 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
>>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 14:52:26 -0500 Rik van Riel
>>>
On 11/21/2014 09:29 PM, Rik van Riel wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/21/2014 03:09 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 14:52:26 -0500 Rik van Riel
wrote:
When manipulating just one semaphore with semop, sem_lock only
takes that single semaphore's lock.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/22/2014 08:56 AM, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> Hi Rik,
>
> good catch - I completely forgot to check the initialization
>
> On 11/22/2014 04:40 AM, Rik van Riel wrote:
>>
>> newary initializes a bunch of things after the call to ipc_addid,
>>
Hi Rik,
good catch - I completely forgot to check the initialization
On 11/22/2014 04:40 AM, Rik van Riel wrote:
newary initializes a bunch of things after the call to
ipc_addid, however some things are initialized inside
ipc_addid as well
Looking closer at newary, I suppose that it should
Hi Rik,
good catch - I completely forgot to check the initialization
On 11/22/2014 04:40 AM, Rik van Riel wrote:
newary initializes a bunch of things after the call to
ipc_addid, however some things are initialized inside
ipc_addid as well
Looking closer at newary, I suppose that it should
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/22/2014 08:56 AM, Manfred Spraul wrote:
Hi Rik,
good catch - I completely forgot to check the initialization
On 11/22/2014 04:40 AM, Rik van Riel wrote:
newary initializes a bunch of things after the call to ipc_addid,
however some
On 11/21/2014 09:29 PM, Rik van Riel wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/21/2014 03:09 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 14:52:26 -0500 Rik van Riel r...@redhat.com
wrote:
When manipulating just one semaphore with semop, sem_lock only
takes that single
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/22/2014 02:14 PM, Manfred Spraul wrote:
On 11/21/2014 09:29 PM, Rik van Riel wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
On 11/21/2014 03:09 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 14:52:26 -0500 Rik van Riel
r...@redhat.com
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/21/2014 07:56 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-11-21 at 18:03 -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:
>> In other words, if you try to use a semaphore array before getsem
>> returns, you can oops the task that calls semop.
>
> This seems bogus
On Fri, 2014-11-21 at 18:03 -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On 11/21/2014 03:42 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 15:29:27 -0500 Rik van Riel
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On 11/21/2014 03:09 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 14:52:26 -0500 Rik van Riel
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/21/2014 03:42 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 15:29:27 -0500 Rik van Riel
> wrote:
>
>> On 11/21/2014 03:09 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
>>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 14:52:26 -0500 Rik van Riel
>>> wrote:
>>>
When manipulating
On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 15:29:27 -0500 Rik van Riel wrote:
> On 11/21/2014 03:09 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 14:52:26 -0500 Rik van Riel
> > wrote:
> >
> >> When manipulating just one semaphore with semop, sem_lock only
> >> takes that single semaphore's lock. This creates a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/21/2014 03:09 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 14:52:26 -0500 Rik van Riel
> wrote:
>
>> When manipulating just one semaphore with semop, sem_lock only
>> takes that single semaphore's lock. This creates a problem during
>>
On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 14:52:26 -0500 Rik van Riel wrote:
> When manipulating just one semaphore with semop, sem_lock only takes that
> single semaphore's lock. This creates a problem during initialization of
> the semaphore array, when the data structures used by sem_lock have not
> been set up
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 02:52:26PM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:
> When manipulating just one semaphore with semop, sem_lock only takes that
> single semaphore's lock. This creates a problem during initialization of
> the semaphore array, when the data structures used by sem_lock have not
> been set
When manipulating just one semaphore with semop, sem_lock only takes that
single semaphore's lock. This creates a problem during initialization of
the semaphore array, when the data structures used by sem_lock have not
been set up yet. The sma->lock is already held by newary, and we just
have to
When manipulating just one semaphore with semop, sem_lock only takes that
single semaphore's lock. This creates a problem during initialization of
the semaphore array, when the data structures used by sem_lock have not
been set up yet. The sma-lock is already held by newary, and we just
have to
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 02:52:26PM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:
When manipulating just one semaphore with semop, sem_lock only takes that
single semaphore's lock. This creates a problem during initialization of
the semaphore array, when the data structures used by sem_lock have not
been set up
On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 14:52:26 -0500 Rik van Riel r...@redhat.com wrote:
When manipulating just one semaphore with semop, sem_lock only takes that
single semaphore's lock. This creates a problem during initialization of
the semaphore array, when the data structures used by sem_lock have not
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/21/2014 03:09 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 14:52:26 -0500 Rik van Riel r...@redhat.com
wrote:
When manipulating just one semaphore with semop, sem_lock only
takes that single semaphore's lock. This creates a problem during
On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 15:29:27 -0500 Rik van Riel r...@redhat.com wrote:
On 11/21/2014 03:09 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 14:52:26 -0500 Rik van Riel r...@redhat.com
wrote:
When manipulating just one semaphore with semop, sem_lock only
takes that single semaphore's lock.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/21/2014 03:42 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 15:29:27 -0500 Rik van Riel r...@redhat.com
wrote:
On 11/21/2014 03:09 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 14:52:26 -0500 Rik van Riel
r...@redhat.com wrote:
When
On Fri, 2014-11-21 at 18:03 -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:
On 11/21/2014 03:42 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 15:29:27 -0500 Rik van Riel r...@redhat.com
wrote:
On 11/21/2014 03:09 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 14:52:26 -0500 Rik van Riel
r...@redhat.com
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/21/2014 07:56 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
On Fri, 2014-11-21 at 18:03 -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:
In other words, if you try to use a semaphore array before getsem
returns, you can oops the task that calls semop.
This seems bogus from an
34 matches
Mail list logo
