[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120820145550.GA18499@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 16:55:50 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, dhowells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: lockdep trace from posix timers
On 08/20, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2012-08-17 at 17:14 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > I still think that task_work_add() should synhronize with exit_task_work()
> > itself and fail if necessary. But I wasn't able to convince Al ;)
>
> I'm not at all sure how that relates to needing task_lock() in the
> keyctl stuff.
To serialize with exit_mm() which clears ->mm.
We shouldn't do task_work_add(task) if the exiting task has already
passed exit_task_work(). There is no way to do this after ed3e694d7
(and I think this is wrong), so keyctl relies on the fact that
exit_task_work() is called after exit_mm().
> Also, can't task_work use llist stuff? That would also avoid using
> ->pi_lock.
Not sure.... task_work_add/run can use cmpxchg, but _cancel can't.
Oleg.
--
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