Re: [patch 0/5] lightweight robust futexes: -V1

[Ingo Molnar]

* Johannes Stezenbach <js@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Anyway: If a process can trash its robust futext list and then die 
> with a segfault, why are the futexes still robust? In this case the 
> kernel has no way to wake up waiters with FUTEX_OWNER_DEAD, or does 
> it?

that's memory corruption - which robust futexes do not (and cannot) 
solve. Robustness is mostly about handling sudden death (e.g. which is 
due to oom, or is due to a user killing the task, or due to the 
application crashing in some non-memory-corrupting way), but it cannot 
handle all possible failure modes.

	Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/