[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081023094621.GA7995@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 11:46:21 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, travis@....com,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] work_on_cpu: use on
x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
On 10/23, Rusty Russell wrote:
>
> +static int __cpuinit detect_cache_attributes(unsigned int cpu)
> +{
> + int retval;
> +
> + if (num_cache_leaves == 0)
> + return -ENOENT;
> +
> + per_cpu(cpuid4_info, cpu) = kzalloc(
> + sizeof(struct _cpuid4_info) * num_cache_leaves, GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (per_cpu(cpuid4_info, cpu) == NULL)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + retval = work_on_cpu(cpu, get_cpu_leaves, NULL);
This doesn't look right.
cache_add_dev()->cpuid4_cache_sysfs_init()->detect_cache_attributes()
is called by CPU_ONLINE under cpu_hotplug_begin(), this is deadlockable.
Yes, the caller (cpu_hotplug.active_writer) can safely take
get_online_cpus(), but if we have another pending work which needs
get_online_cpus(), we have the deadlock.
Oleg.
--
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