From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: nick <xerofoify@gmail.com>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm:Avoid soft lockup due to possible attempt of double locking object's lock in __delete_object
Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2016 20:45:19 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1473209119.32433.174.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e2e8b8fc-3deb-aa23-c54e-43f12dd0a941@gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1203 bytes --]
On Wed, 2016-08-31 at 09:24 -0400, nick wrote:
>
> On 2016-08-31 03:54 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 02:35:12PM -0400, Nicholas Krause wrote:
> > > This fixes a issue in the current locking logic of the function,
> > > __delete_object where we are trying to attempt to lock the passed
> > > object structure's spinlock again after being previously held
> > > elsewhere by the kmemleak code. Fix this by instead of assuming
> > > we are the only one contending for the object's lock their are
> > > possible other users and create two branches, one where we get
> > > the lock when calling spin_trylock_irqsave on the object's lock
> > > and the other when the lock is held else where by kmemleak.
> >
> > Have you actually got a deadlock that requires this fix?
> >
> Yes I have got a deadlock that this does fix.
Why don't you share the backtrace with us?
Claiming you have a deadlock, but not sharing
it on the list means nobody can see what the
problem is you are trying to address.
It would be good if every email with a patch
that you post starts with an actual detailed
problem description.
Can you do that?
--
All Rights Reversed.
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-07 0:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-30 18:35 [PATCH] mm:Avoid soft lockup due to possible attempt of double locking object's lock in __delete_object Nicholas Krause
2016-08-31 7:54 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-08-31 13:24 ` nick
2016-09-07 0:45 ` Rik van Riel [this message]
2016-08-31 13:41 ` nick
2016-08-31 14:35 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-08-31 21:08 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2016-08-31 21:28 ` nick
2016-09-07 0:51 ` Rik van Riel
2016-09-07 1:12 ` nick
2016-09-07 1:22 ` Rik van Riel
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=1473209119.32433.174.camel@redhat.com \
--to=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=xerofoify@gmail.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).