lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 19:18:39 +1000 From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au> To: Anton Altaparmakov <aia21@....ac.uk> CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, eike-kernel@...tec.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, aia21@...tab.net Subject: Re: [BUG?] possible recursive locking detected Anton Altaparmakov wrote: > On Thu, 2006-07-27 at 00:38 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > >>On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 08:15:27 +0100 >>Anton Altaparmakov <aia21@....ac.uk> wrote: >> >> >>>>I'm surprised ext2 is allocating with __GFP_FS set, though. Would that >>>>cause any problem? >>> >>>That is an ext2 bug IMO. >> >>There is no bug. >> >>What there is is an ill-defined set of rules. If we want to tighten these >>rules we have a choice between > > > I beg to differ. It is a bug. You cannot reenter the file system when > the file system is trying to allocate memory. Otherwise you can never > allocate memory with any locks held or you are bound to introduce an > A->B B->A deadlock somewhere. I don't think it is a bug in general. It really depends on the allocation: - If it is a path that might be required in order to writeout a page, then yes GFP_NOFS is going to help prevent deadlocks. - If it is a path where you'll take the same locks as page reclaim requires, then again GFP_NOFS is required. For NTFS case, it seems like holding i_mutex on the write path falls foul of the second problem. But I agree with Andrew that this is a critical case where we do have to enter the fs. GFP_NOFS is too big a hammer to use. I guess you'd have to change NTFS to do something sane privately, or come up with a nice general solution that doesn't harm the common filesystems that apparently don't have a problem here... can you just add GFP_NOFS to NTFS's mapping_gfp_mask to start with? -- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists