From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Paul Menage <menage@google.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [cgroup or VFS ?] INFO: possible recursive locking detected
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 04:37:33 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090210043733.GY28946@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4990EF3F.3010501@cn.fujitsu.com>
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 11:06:39AM +0800, Li Zefan wrote:
> BTW, I found another bug in current code:
Why is that a bug? If _anything_ had been trying to acquire the
rwsem in question, it would be fscked anyway. Not to mention
that nothing could have ever seen that struct super_block in this
particular case, as a general rule
* if something might be blocked on your mutex/rwsem or spinning
on a spinlock, releasing it before you free the object won't save your
arse.
You have no promise whatsoever that whoever's been trying to
get the lock in question will even get out of the locking primitive
before the memory that contains the lock gets freed. In case of superblocks
in general, you don't free them until ->s_count hits zero. At that point
anything as much as remembering the address of that superblock is already
FUBAR.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-02-10 4:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-05 3:23 [cgroup or VFS ?] INFO: possible recursive locking detected Li Zefan
2009-01-08 3:45 ` Li Zefan
2009-02-09 11:23 ` Al Viro
2009-02-09 11:38 ` Li Zefan
2009-02-09 11:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-02-10 3:06 ` Li Zefan
2009-02-10 4:37 ` Al Viro [this message]
2009-02-10 5:19 ` Li Zefan
2009-02-10 6:07 ` Al Viro
2009-02-10 9:25 ` Li Zefan
2009-02-12 6:14 ` Li Zefan
2009-02-10 8:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=20090210043733.GY28946@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=menage@google.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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