linux-kernel - Re: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/rwsem.c:131 XFS? (was: Re: linux-next: Tree for October 17)

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 22 Oct 2008 06:13:51 -0400
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@...il.com>, lachlan@....com,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>, xfs@....sgi.com,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at
	kernel/rwsem.c:131 XFS? (was: Re: linux-next: Tree for October 17)

On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 07:25:50PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > Basically the above commit moved xfs_ilock() inside
> > radix_tree_preload()/radix_tree_preload_end(), which means we are
> > taking a rwsem() while we have an elevated preempt count. I'll
> > get a patch out to fix it.

This really needs a warning.  Then again I don't really understand this
as the point of radix_tree_preload was that we can do the actual
radix-tree under a lock, or not?

Anyway, the patch looks correct to me, including the slightly unrelated
hunk to fix the missing unlock and preload leak.
--
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/