linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] fs-writeback: drop wb->list_lock during blk_finish

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 linux-cve-announce 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, 11 Sep 2015 17:52:27 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Chris Mason <clm@...com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Josef Bacik <jbacik@...com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>,
	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs-writeback: drop wb->list_lock during blk_finish_plug()

On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 4:36 PM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> Are we really ok with waiting synchronously for an inode while holding
> the plug? No chance of deadlock (waiting for IO that we've plugged)?
> That issue is true even of the current code, though, and I have _not_
> really thought that through, it's just a worry.

Never mind. We still flush the plug on explicit scheduling events.  I
wonder why I thought we got rid of that. Some kind of "senior moment",
I guess.

            Linus
--
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/