From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Al Viro Subject: Re: fs/dcache.c - BUG: soft lockup - CPU#5 stuck for 22s! [systemd-udevd:1667] Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 17:53:51 +0100 Message-ID: <20140529165351.GM18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20140529031149.GE18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20140529035233.GF18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20140529053444.GI18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20140529105107.GB1938@lahna.fi.intel.com> <20140529110439.GA2006@lahna.fi.intel.com> <20140529133036.GJ18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20140529154454.GK18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20140529162307.GL18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Mika Westerberg , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Miklos Szeredi , linux-fsdevel To: Linus Torvalds Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 09:29:42AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Al Viro wrote: > > > > BTW, lock_parent() might be better off if in contended case it would not > > bother with rename_lock and did something like this: > > again: > > Ack. I think that's much better. Pushed to #for-linus (with dumb braino fixed - it's if (parent != dentry), not if (parent)). I'll wait with folding it back into the commit that introduces lock_parent() until we get testing results...