[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <43b4250d-d9b5-a4b6-ee1b-d256ecddd105@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2019 12:07:02 -0400
From: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@...il.com>,
stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH-tip v6 01/20] locking/rwsem: Prevent decrement of reader
count before increment
On 4/28/19 11:57 AM, Waiman Long wrote:
> During my rwsem testing, it was found that after a down_read(), the
> reader count may occasionally become 0 or even negative. Consequently,
> a writer may steal the lock at that time and execute with the reader
> in parallel thus breaking the mutual exclusion guarantee of the write
> lock. In other words, both readers and writer can become rwsem owners
> simultaneously.
I would like to have this particular patch merged in the next merge
window, if possible, so that I can backport it downstream.
Thanks,
Longman
Powered by blists - more mailing lists