[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080703160117.b3781463.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 16:01:17 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
Cc: balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.26-rc8-mm1] memrlimit: fix mmap_sem deadlock
On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 21:50:31 +0100 (BST)
Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com> wrote:
> "ps -f" hung after "killall make" of make -j20 kernel builds. It's
> generally considered bad manners to down_write something you already
> have down_read. exit_mm up_reads before calling mm_update_next_owner,
> so I guess exec_mmap can safely do so too. (And with that repositioning
> there's not much point in mm_need_new_owner allowing for NULL mm.)
>
thanks
> ---
> Fix to memrlimit-cgroup-mm-owner-callback-changes-to-add-task-info.patch
> quite independent of its recent sleeping-inside-spinlock fix; could even
> be applied to 2.6.26, though no deadlock there. Gosh, I see those patches
> have spawned "Reviewed-by" tags in my name: sorry, no, just "Bug-found-by".
I switched
memrlimit-add-memrlimit-controller-accounting-and-control-memrlimit-improve-fork-and-error-handling.patch
and
memrlimit-cgroup-mm-owner-callback-changes-to-add-task-info-memrlimit-fix-sleep-inside-sleeplock-in-mm_update_next_owner.patch
to Cc:you.
There doesn't seem to have been much discussion regarding your recent
objections to the memrlimit patches. But it caused me to put a big
black mark on them. Perhaps sending it all again would be helpful.
--
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