From: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
To: "Van Maren, Kevin" <kevin.vanmaren@unisys.com>
Cc: "'Andi Kleen'" <ak@suse.de>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Linux-ia64] Linux kernel deadlock caused by spinlock bug
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 10:44:57 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020730174457.GB25038@holomorphy.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3FAD1088D4556046AEC48D80B47B478C0101F3B2@usslc-exch-4.slc.unisys.com>
On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 12:06:54PM -0500, Van Maren, Kevin wrote:
> It isn't obvious to me how to extend those queued to reader/writer
> locks if you have to allow recursive readers without incurring the
> same overhead of tracking which processors already have a reader lock.
> If you do want to trigger recursive rw_locks, simply change the header
> file to make them normal spinlocks. Then whenever the kernel hangs,
> see where it is. Of course, this approach only finds all of them if
> you execute every code path.
> Does anyone want to chip in on why we need recursive r/w locks? Or why it
> is hard to remove them? It doesn't sound like they are used much.
The tasklist_lock is taken in interrupt context by sigio generation,
and read_locks on it are permitted to be interrupted by other read_locks,
where write_locks of it must mask interrupts locally to prevent deadlock.
I think IA64 performance monitor code does it in interrupt context too.
Older (2.4.x and 2.5.x-early) took the tasklist_lock in interrupt
context to compute the load average by traversing the list of all tasks.
My concern when I changed that was largely timeslice overrun.
Cheers,
Bill
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-07-30 17:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-07-30 17:06 [Linux-ia64] Linux kernel deadlock caused by spinlock bug Van Maren, Kevin
2002-07-30 17:44 ` William Lee Irwin III [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-07-30 21:15 Van Maren, Kevin
[not found] <3FAD1088D4556046AEC48D80B47B478C0101F3AE@usslc-exch-4.slc.unisys.com.suse.lists.linux.kernel>
2002-07-30 13:32 ` Andi Kleen
2002-07-30 16:27 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-07-29 21:29 Van Maren, Kevin
2002-07-29 21:48 ` David Mosberger
2002-07-29 21:05 Van Maren, Kevin
2002-07-29 21:18 ` Matthew Wilcox
2002-07-30 15:58 ` Russell Lewis
2002-07-30 16:56 ` Richard B. Johnson
2002-07-30 17:02 ` Russell Lewis
2002-07-30 17:14 ` Richard B. Johnson
2002-07-30 22:48 ` Sean Griffin
2002-07-31 17:37 ` Russell Lewis
2002-07-29 20:37 Van Maren, Kevin
2002-07-29 20:46 ` [Linux-ia64] " Matthew Wilcox
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=20020730174457.GB25038@holomorphy.com \
--to=wli@holomorphy.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=kevin.vanmaren@unisys.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox