Re: HARD LOCKUP: Strange hard lock up on spin_lock(&sighand->siglock);

[Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>]

Sorry for delay, vacation.

I'll try to re-read your email later, just one note for now...

On 07/27, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>
> Based on that I think could be happening is that the sighand itself is
> being freed while we are in the grace period inside __lock_task_sighand
> but the slab page itself is not freed as per the semantics of
> SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU. I looked up the source of this function in the
> latest kernels and saw that Oleg had put a comment clarifying the
> semantics but I'm still not convinced that it is safe. What if
> we are trying to lock the spinlock before this particular slab is
> initialised with sighand_ctor?

But this is not possible? ->sighand can never point to the uninitialized
struct sighand_struct.

Just in case... please note that if ->sighand was freed and then
re-allocated while __lock_task_sighand() spins under rcu_read_lock(),
sighand_ctor() won't be called again (due to SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU).
Perhaps this was the source of your confusion?

Oleg.