[<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