All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com>
To: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
Cc: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@novell.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org" <lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org>
Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] [PATCH] x86/hwmon: avoid deadlock on CPU removal
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 01:59:36 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100915015936.GE8081@ericsson.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100915001259.GA1237@fenghua-desk.sc.intel.com>

On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 08:13:00PM -0400, Fenghua Yu wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 03:11:05AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > pkgtemp_device_remove(), holding the list protecting mutex, calls
> > pkgtemp_device_add(), which itself wants to acquire the same mutex.
> > Holding the mutex over the entire loop body in pkgtemp_device_remove()
> > isn't really necessary, as long as the loop gets exited after
> > processing the matched CPU.
> > 
> > Once exiting the loop after removing an eventual match, there's no
> > need for using the "safe" list iterator anymore.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com>
> > Cc: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
> > 
> > ---
> >  drivers/hwmon/pkgtemp.c |    7 ++++---
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > 
> > --- linux-2.6.36-rc4/drivers/hwmon/pkgtemp.c	2010-09-13 08:45:03.000000000 +0200
> > +++ 2.6.36-rc4-x86-pkgtemp-remove-deadlock/drivers/hwmon/pkgtemp.c	2010-09-03 17:54:30.000000000 +0200
> > @@ -339,17 +339,18 @@ exit:
> >  #ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU
> >  static void pkgtemp_device_remove(unsigned int cpu)
> 
> I already sent a  fix patch before. I'll push it to Linus.
> 
Guess it got lost. Re-sending it might have helped, or adding an Acked-by to this patch.

Guenter

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com>
To: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
Cc: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@novell.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org" <lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org>
Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] [PATCH] x86/hwmon: avoid deadlock on CPU removal in pkgtemp
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 18:59:36 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100915015936.GE8081@ericsson.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100915001259.GA1237@fenghua-desk.sc.intel.com>

On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 08:13:00PM -0400, Fenghua Yu wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 03:11:05AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > pkgtemp_device_remove(), holding the list protecting mutex, calls
> > pkgtemp_device_add(), which itself wants to acquire the same mutex.
> > Holding the mutex over the entire loop body in pkgtemp_device_remove()
> > isn't really necessary, as long as the loop gets exited after
> > processing the matched CPU.
> > 
> > Once exiting the loop after removing an eventual match, there's no
> > need for using the "safe" list iterator anymore.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com>
> > Cc: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
> > 
> > ---
> >  drivers/hwmon/pkgtemp.c |    7 ++++---
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > 
> > --- linux-2.6.36-rc4/drivers/hwmon/pkgtemp.c	2010-09-13 08:45:03.000000000 +0200
> > +++ 2.6.36-rc4-x86-pkgtemp-remove-deadlock/drivers/hwmon/pkgtemp.c	2010-09-03 17:54:30.000000000 +0200
> > @@ -339,17 +339,18 @@ exit:
> >  #ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU
> >  static void pkgtemp_device_remove(unsigned int cpu)
> 
> I already sent a  fix patch before. I'll push it to Linus.
> 
Guess it got lost. Re-sending it might have helped, or adding an Acked-by to this patch.

Guenter

  reply	other threads:[~2010-09-15  1:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-09-13 10:11 [lm-sensors] [PATCH] x86/hwmon: avoid deadlock on CPU removal in Jan Beulich
2010-09-13 10:11 ` [PATCH] x86/hwmon: avoid deadlock on CPU removal in pkgtemp Jan Beulich
2010-09-15  0:13 ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH] x86/hwmon: avoid deadlock on CPU removal Fenghua Yu
2010-09-15  0:13   ` [PATCH] x86/hwmon: avoid deadlock on CPU removal in pkgtemp Fenghua Yu
2010-09-15  1:59   ` Guenter Roeck [this message]
2010-09-15  1:59     ` [lm-sensors] " Guenter Roeck
2010-09-15  7:35   ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH] x86/hwmon: avoid deadlock on CPU removal Jan Beulich
2010-09-15  7:35     ` [PATCH] x86/hwmon: avoid deadlock on CPU removal in pkgtemp Jan Beulich

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20100915015936.GE8081@ericsson.com \
    --to=guenter.roeck@ericsson.com \
    --cc=JBeulich@novell.com \
    --cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.