[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181022100952.GA1147@jagdpanzerIV>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2018 19:09:52 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
To: Daniel Wang <wonderfly@...gle.com>
Cc: sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
rostedt@...dmis.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
Alexander.Levin@...rosoft.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
byungchul.park@....com, dave.hansen@...el.com, hannes@...xchg.org,
jack@...e.cz, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, mhocko@...nel.org, pavel@....cz,
penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp, peterz@...radead.org,
tj@...nel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, vbabka@...e.cz,
Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
Peter Feiner <pfeiner@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: 4.14 backport request for dbdda842fe96f: "printk: Add console
owner and waiter logic to load balance console writes"
On (10/21/18 11:09), Daniel Wang wrote:
>
> Just got back from vacation. Thanks for the continued discussion. Just so
> I understand the current state. Looks like we've got a pretty good explanation
> of what's going on (though not completely sure), and backporting Steven's
> patches is still the way to go?
Up to -stable maintainers.
Note, with or without Steven's patch, the non-reentrable consoles are
still non-reentrable, so the deadlock is still there:
spin_lock_irqsave(&port->lock, flags)
<NMI>
panic()
console_flush_on_panic()
spin_lock_irqsave(&port->lock, flags) // deadlock
// And I wouldn't mind to have more reviews/testing on [1].
Another deadlock scenario could be the following one:
printk()
console_trylock()
down_trylock()
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->lock, flags)
<NMI>
panic()
console_flush_on_panic()
console_trylock()
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->lock, flags) // deadlock
There are no patches addressing this one at the moment. And it's
unclear if you are hitting this scenario.
> I see that Sergey had sent an RFC series for similar things. Are those
> trying to solve the deadlock problem in a different way?
Umm, I wouldn't call it "another way". It turns non-reentrant serial
consoles to re-entrable ones. Did you test patch [1] from that series
on you environment, by the way?
[1] lkml.kernel.org/r/20181016050428.17966-2-sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com
-ss
Powered by blists - more mailing lists