[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131109155938.GC4971@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2013 16:59:38 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: perf/tracepoint: another fuzzer generated lockup
On Sat, Nov 09, 2013 at 04:27:01PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> In fact, raising an irq work from an irq work should simply be prohibited. That's not a sane
> behaviour.
Well, it is because as you raised on IRC we could be holding locks and
trying to avoid deadlocks. This is the very reason irq_work gets used in
printk.
And its not a recursive run()->work()->queue() either, because as you said this
tracepoint is in arch code _after_ work_run completes.
All in all an exceedingly vexing issue.
--
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