[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1411728032.23429.63.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 13:40:32 +0300
From: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>
To: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
Cc: linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] UBI: Fix possible deadlock in erase_worker()
On Mon, 2014-09-22 at 10:45 +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> If sync_erase() fails with EINTR, ENOMEM, EAGAIN or
> EBUSY erase_worker() re-schedules the failed work.
> This will lead to a deadlock because erase_worker() is called
> with work_sem held in read mode. And schedule_erase() will take
> this lock again.
>
> Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
Did you manage to test it?
Why no -stable this time? Not that important, or just something
theoretical and you never actually hit this bug?
Thanks!
--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy
--
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