[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <18614.24929.952454.829021@notabene.brown>
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 18:27:13 +1000
From: Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>
To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, jurriaan <thunder7@...all.nl>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.27-rc4: lots of 'in_atomic():1, irqs_disabled():0' with software-raid1
On Thursday August 28, jens.axboe@...cle.com wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 28 2008, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >
> > Cant sleep inside rcu_read_lock(), with CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU=n, at least.
> >
> > Dunno if it's legal if CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU=y. Hopefully not - that
> > would be insane. But I've failed to keep up with rcu goings-on
> > recently.
>
> Doh right, we of course can't block inside a RCU section. Then
> bitmap.c:write_sb_page() wants fixing:
>
> rcu_read_lock();
> rdev_for_each_rcu(...)
> md_super_write(...)
> bio_alloc(GFP_NOIO, 1);
>
> Neil?
Yes......
And not only can't I call bio_alloc inside the rcu_read_lock, I also
cannot call submit_bio, as that can do a mempool alloc for a request
structure.
I can get around that by putting the bios on the ->biolist that
md_super_wait will resubmit requests from. But I still need to
allocate those bios.
Maybe I can count how many there need to be, then allocate them and
make a list, then pass them down into md_super_write.
It's a bit ugly but it should work.
I think I'll have to think about it a bit more.
Thanks,
NeilBrown
--
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