[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160126164120.GA3047@lst.de>
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 17:41:20 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org >> Linux Kernel Mailing List"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-s390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
KVM list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: regression 4.4: deadlock in with cgroup percpu_rwsem
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 10:28:46AM -0500, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hmmm... why do you need to call percpu_ref_exit() from process
> context? All it does is freeing the percpu counter and resetting the
> state, both of which can be done from any context.
I checked and that's true indeed. You cought me doing cargo cult
programming as the callers I looked at already do this.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists