All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Cong Wang <amwang@redhat.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jiri Pirko <jpirko@redhat.com>,
	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@vyatta.com>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	bonding-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
	Jay Vosburgh <fubar@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch] bonding: fix potential deadlock in bond_uninit()
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 10:49:05 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BB409A1.7090701@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m1d3ykzq5a.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org>

Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Amerigo Wang <amwang@redhat.com> writes:
> 
>> bond_uninit() is invoked with rtnl_lock held, when it does destroy_workqueue()
>> which will potentially flush all works in this workqueue, if we hold rtnl_lock
>> again in the work function, it will deadlock.
>>
>> So unlock rtnl_lock before calling destroy_workqueue().
> 
> Ouch.  That seems rather rude to our caller, and likely very
> dangerous.


This is reasonable, because workqueue flush functions will potentially
call all the work functions which could take the same lock taken before
the flush call, thus deadlock.

> 
> Is this a deadlock you actually hit, or is this something lockdep
> warned about?

It's only a lockdep warning.

> 
> My gut feel says we need to move the destroy_workqueue into
> the network device destructor.
> 

Oh, this seems a better idea, as long as the destructor are not called
with any locks holding.

Thanks!

      parent reply	other threads:[~2010-04-01  2:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-03-31 10:52 [Patch] bonding: fix potential deadlock in bond_uninit() Amerigo Wang
2010-03-31 11:28 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-03-31 23:02   ` Stephen Hemminger
2010-04-01  2:49   ` Cong Wang [this message]

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=4BB409A1.7090701@redhat.com \
    --to=amwang@redhat.com \
    --cc=bonding-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=fubar@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=jpirko@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=shemminger@vyatta.com \
    /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.