linux-kernel - Re: "blocked for more than 120 secs" --> a valid situation, how to prevent?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1285293493.17998.2.camel@maxim-laptop>
Date:	Fri, 24 Sep 2010 03:58:13 +0200
From:	Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@...il.com>
To:	Mark Lord <kernel@...savvy.com>
Cc:	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	IDE/ATA development list <linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: "blocked for more than 120 secs" --> a valid situation, how to
 prevent?

On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 19:41 -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
> What's the purpose of this stack dump,
> and how can it be prevented in this NORMAL situation??
> 
> The command was "hdparm --security-erase NULL /dev/sdb",
> which takes about 66 minutes to complete on this particular drive.
> 
> I don't see any obvious way for the task to mark itself
> as needing longer than 120 secs to complete the operation.

There is other valid user case.
If application calls sys_sync and at same time the filesystem is written
by an other application, the sync can easily take more that 2 minutes.
Or if block device is slow (as it was with some flash cards).

Indeed it would be good to have a kind of touch_softlockup_watchdog().

Best regards,
	Maxim Levitsky

--
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/