[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150825083059.GA20801@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 10:30:59 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@...mail.com>
Cc: Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: fix tsk->pi_lock isn't held when
do_set_cpus_allowed()
* Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@...mail.com> wrote:
> >>--- a/kernel/cpuset.c
> >>+++ b/kernel/cpuset.c
> >>@@ -2376,8 +2376,12 @@ void cpuset_cpus_allowed(struct task_struct *tsk, struct cpumask *pmask)
> >> void cpuset_cpus_allowed_fallback(struct task_struct *tsk)
> >> {
> >>+ unsigned long flags;
> >>+
> >> rcu_read_lock();
> >>+ raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&tsk->pi_lock, flags);
> >> do_set_cpus_allowed(tsk, task_cs(tsk)->effective_cpus);
> >>+ raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&tsk->pi_lock, flags);
> >Just curious, Will introduce deadlock after acquire lock twice? ;)
>
> Could you point out where acquires lock twice?
In the code you quote?
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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