[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090330164054.GA2723@ami.dom.local>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 18:40:54 +0200
From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc: Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@...ppelsdorf.de>,
Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: WARNING: at net/ipv4/tcp_input.c:2927 tcp_ack+0xd55/0x1991()
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 08:01:50AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 08:51:07 +0000
> Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > Probably I miss something, but generally in a case like this "a_lock"
> > doesn't have to be taken in IRQ mode to be dangerous. Eg. if one cpu
> > is trying to take this lock after fasync_lock (with IRQs disabled),
> > while another cpu is waiting for fasync_lock in IRQ, which preempted
> > such "a_lock".
>
> The possibility exists, I guess, yes.
>
> > Could you give some details of this fix?
>
> I just reverse the order of lock acquisition in fasync_helper(). Patch
> is attached. I'll be sending up a pull request shortly.
Yes, this patch should fix this. (And I can see it in the linux-next
now...)
Thanks,
Jarek P.
>
> jon
>
> From 4a6a4499693a419a20559c41e33a7bd70bf20a6f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
> Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 12:24:31 -0600
> Subject: [PATCH] Fix a lockdep warning in fasync_helper()
>
> Lockdep gripes if file->f_lock is taken in a no-IRQ situation, since that
> is not always the case. We don't really want to disable IRQs for every
> acquisition of f_lock; instead, just move it outside of fasync_lock.
>
> Reported-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@...il.com>
> Reported-by: Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>
> Reported-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
> ---
> fs/fcntl.c | 10 +++++++---
> include/linux/fs.h | 2 +-
> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/fcntl.c b/fs/fcntl.c
> index d865ca6..cc8e4de 100644
> --- a/fs/fcntl.c
> +++ b/fs/fcntl.c
> @@ -531,6 +531,12 @@ int fasync_helper(int fd, struct file * filp, int on, struct fasync_struct **fap
> if (!new)
> return -ENOMEM;
> }
> +
> + /*
> + * We need to take f_lock first since it's not an IRQ-safe
> + * lock.
> + */
> + spin_lock(&filp->f_lock);
> write_lock_irq(&fasync_lock);
> for (fp = fapp; (fa = *fp) != NULL; fp = &fa->fa_next) {
> if (fa->fa_file == filp) {
> @@ -555,14 +561,12 @@ int fasync_helper(int fd, struct file * filp, int on, struct fasync_struct **fap
> result = 1;
> }
> out:
> - /* Fix up FASYNC bit while still holding fasync_lock */
> - spin_lock(&filp->f_lock);
> if (on)
> filp->f_flags |= FASYNC;
> else
> filp->f_flags &= ~FASYNC;
> - spin_unlock(&filp->f_lock);
> write_unlock_irq(&fasync_lock);
> + spin_unlock(&filp->f_lock);
> return result;
> }
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/fs.h b/include/linux/fs.h
> index 7428c6d..2f13c1d 100644
> --- a/include/linux/fs.h
> +++ b/include/linux/fs.h
> @@ -848,7 +848,7 @@ struct file {
> #define f_dentry f_path.dentry
> #define f_vfsmnt f_path.mnt
> const struct file_operations *f_op;
> - spinlock_t f_lock; /* f_ep_links, f_flags */
> + spinlock_t f_lock; /* f_ep_links, f_flags, no IRQ */
> atomic_long_t f_count;
> unsigned int f_flags;
> fmode_t f_mode;
> --
> 1.6.2
>
--
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