lists.openwall.net   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 08:54:28 -0400
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>
Cc:	Pavel Shilovsky <piastry@...rsoft.ru>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-cifs <linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org>,
	Steve French <sfrench@...ba.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>,
	"Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <lclaudio@...g.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, uobergfe@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] cifs: Fix possible deadlock with cifs and work
 queues

On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 08:41:28 -0400
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com> wrote:


> 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
> problem.
> 

OK, I'll take a look at them, and maybe I'll just move the oplock
workqueue. I think you are correct and it may be best to move the one
that takes the lock. Keep that one separate and that will keep the
others from being blocked by it.

Thanks, I'll write something up in a bit.

-- Steve

--
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