[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090513115626.57844f28.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Wed, 13 May 2009 11:56:26 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>
Cc:	kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com, balbir@...ibm.com,
	nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [BUGFIX][PATCH] memcg: fix deadlock between lock_page_cgroup
 and mapping tree_lock
On Wed, 13 May 2009 13:30:31 +0900
Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp> wrote:
> mapping->tree_lock can be aquired from interrupt context.
> Then, following dead lock can occur.
> 
> Assume "A" as a page.
> 
>  CPU0:
>        lock_page_cgroup(A)
> 		interrupted
> 			-> take mapping->tree_lock.
>  CPU1:
>        take mapping->tree_lock
> 		-> lock_page_cgroup(A)
And we didn't find out about this because lock_page_cgroup() uses
bit_spin_lock(), and lockdep doesn't handle bit_spin_lock().
It would perhaps be useful if one of you guys were to add a spinlock to
struct page, convert lock_page_cgroup() to use that spinlock then run a
full set of tests under lockdep, see if it can shake out any other bugs.
--
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
 
