[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1207231620.8514.829.camel@twins>
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2008 16:07:00 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: David Chinner <dgc@....com>
Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>, xfs-masters@....sgi.com,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: xfs_io "BUG: lock held when returning to user space!" on
suspend
On Thu, 2008-04-03 at 15:53 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-04-03 at 07:57 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 11:58:54AM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> > > I'm getting this:
> > >
> > > ================================================
> > > [ BUG: lock held when returning to user space! ]
> > > ------------------------------------------------
> > > xfs_io/18796 is leaving the kernel with locks still held!
> > > 1 lock held by xfs_io/18796:
> > > #0: (&type->s_umount_key#19){----}, at: [<c048c9ac>] get_super+0x42/0x87
> > >
> > > when I suspend, possibly during an xfs-freeze. There don't seem to be any
> > > ill-effects.
> >
> > Yup, both the sb->s_umount and bdev->bd_mount_sem seaphores are held
> > across freeze_bdev()/thaw_bdev(), and they are issued via separate
> > ioctls generally from separate processes. Not great design, but not
> > a bug....
>
> Actually... we do consider that bugs.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/10/27/135
Where Linus says:
Definitely not a sane thing to do. It should use ref-counting and/or a
single bit to say "busy".
--
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