[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <515F0456.9040803@sgi.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2013 12:05:26 -0500
From: Nathan Zimmer <nzimmer@....com>
To: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
CC: <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>, <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH resend] fs/proc: Move kfree outside pde_unload_lock
On 04/04/2013 03:44 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 12:12:05PM -0500, Nathan Zimmer wrote:
>
>> Ok I am cloning the tree now.
>> It does look like the patches would conflict.
>> I'll run some tests and take a deeper look.
> FWIW, I've just pushed there a tentative patch that switches to hopefully
> saner locking (head should be at cb673c115c1f99d3480471ca5d8cb3f89a1e3bee).
> Is that more or less what you want wrt spinlock contention?
>
> One note: for any given pde_opener, close_pdeo() can be called at most
> by two threads - final fput() and remove_proc_entry() resp. I think
> the use of completion + flag is safe there; pde->pde_unload_lock
> should serialize the critical areas.
Something isn't quite right. I keep getting hung during boot.
dracut: Mounted root filesystem /dev/sda8
dracut: Switching root
I'll try to get some more info on a smaller box.
--
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