[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m1eilo7iqd.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org>
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 09:18:34 -0800
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com>
Cc: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@...glemail.com>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
linux-pcmcia@...ts.infradead.org,
Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sysfs: Add lockdep annotations for the sysfs active reference
Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com> writes:
> On Sat, 02 Jan 2010 13:37:12 -0800
> ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman) wrote:
>
>>
>> Holding locks over device_del -> kobject_del -> sysfs_deactivate can
>> cause deadlocks if those same locks are grabbed in sysfs show or store
>> methods.
>>
>> The I model s_active count + completion as a sleeping read/write lock.
>> I describe to lockdep sysfs_get_active as a read_trylock,
>> sysfs_put_active as a read_unlock, and sysfs_deactivate as a
>> write_lock and write_unlock pair. This seems to capture the essence
>> for purposes of finding deadlocks, and in my testing gives finds real
>> issues and ignores non-issues.
>>
>> This brings us back to holding locks over kobject_del is a problem
>> that ideally we should find a way of addressing, but at least lockdep
>> can tell us about the problems instead of requiring developers to
>> debug rare strange system deadlocks, that happen when sysfs files are
>> removed while being written to.
>
> The model has hit a possible deadlock in pcmcia, and the lockdep warning
> comes when I unplug my wlan card from pcmcia slot.
>
> Looks like socket->skt_mutex is held in remove path, and it is also
> grabbed in .stor method.
Looking a little closer this is simultaneously a legitimate problem
and also a false positive.
This is only legitimate if you add/remove a cardbus bridge, plugged into
another cardbus bridge, which I think is unlikely but physically possible.
Eric
--
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