[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1203151556090.2466@ionos>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 15:58:20 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@...il.com>
cc: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: ntp: BUG: spinlock lockup on CPU#1
On Thu, 15 Mar 2012, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> CPU 0 CPU 1
> do_adjtimex()
> spin_lock_irq(&ntp_lock);
> process_adjtimex_modes(); timer_interrupt()
> process_adj_status(); do_timer()
> ntp_start_leap_timer(); write_lock(&xtime_lock);
> hrtimer_start(); update_wall_time();
> hrtimer_reprogram(); ntp_tick_length()
> tick_program_event() spin_lock(&ntp_lock);
> clockevents_program_event()
> ktime_get()
> seq = req_seqbegin(xtime_lock);
>
> So CPU0 waits for xtime seqence to become valid and CPU1 cant make
> progress because it's stuck on ntp_lock.
The same problem exists with ntp_clear() being called under the
xtime/timekeeper lock write locked. Nasty ...
--
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