[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <493EA116.5020208@inria.fr>
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2008 17:47:18 +0100
From: Brice Goglin <Brice.Goglin@...ia.fr>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] No get_user/put_user while holding mmap_sem in do_pages_stat?
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-12-07 at 15:21 +0100, Brice Goglin wrote:
>
>> Andrew Morton wrote:
>>
>>> Was lockdep able to tell you about this in any way?
>>>
>>>
>> With CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING (assuming that it's enough), it doesn't detect
>> the problem for real. It just says "possible recursive locking detected"
>> between do_page_fault and sys_move_pages.
>>
>
> That is real - how much more real do you need a description of a
> recursive deadlock to be?
>
Well, it's a recursive down_read. It could be ok if we had the guarantee
that nobody else would be doing down_write in the middle. lockdep only
complained about this recursive down_read when there was a down_write
actually causing the deadlock, but it didn't say anything about this
down_write in the log.
It would be great if lockdep could say "recursive read-lock is
deadlocking because this other guy (with its backtrace) took for write
in the middle". I needed sysrq-t to get this info.
Brice
--
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