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  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]
Date:	Fri, 21 Mar 2014 08:41:28 -0400
From:	Jeff Layton <>
To:	Steven Rostedt <>
Cc:	Pavel Shilovsky <>,
	LKML <>,
	linux-cifs <>,
	Steve French <>,
	Peter Zijlstra <>,
	Clark Williams <>,
	"Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <>,
	Thomas Gleixner <>,
	Tejun Heo <>,
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] cifs: Fix possible deadlock with cifs and work

On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 08:17:06 -0400
Steven Rostedt <> wrote:

> On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 12:32:12 +0400
> Pavel Shilovsky <> wrote:
> > Read and write codepaths both obtain lock_sem for read and then wait
> > for cifsiod_wq to complete and release lock_sem. They don't do any
> > lock_sem operations inside their work task queued to cifsiod_wq. But
> > oplock code can obtain/release lock_sem in its work task. So, that's
> > why I agree with Jeff and suggest to move the oplock code to a
> > different work queue (cifsioopd_wq?) but leave read and write
> > codepaths use cifsiod_wq.
> OK, how about I submit a second patch that moves the reader and writer
> to its own "safe" workqueue?
> -- Steve

That'd probably work fine too. The main point is to make sure oplock
breaks run on a different workqueue from where read or write completion
jobs run since they are operating on the lock_sem. The other jobs that
get queued to cifsiod_wq don't touch the lock_sem and shouldn't be a

Jeff Layton <>
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists