[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <71d6f14e-46af-cc5a-bc70-af1cdc6de8d5@acm.org>
Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2022 08:37:55 -0800
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
syzbot <syzbot+831661966588c802aae9@...kaller.appspotmail.com>,
jgg@...pe.ca, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [syzbot] possible deadlock in worker_thread
On 2/11/22 21:31, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> But this report might be suggesting us that we should consider
> deprecating (and eventually getting rid of) system-wide workqueues
> (declared in include/linux/workqueue.h), for since flush_workqueue()
> synchronously waits for completion, sharing system-wide workqueues
> among multiple modules can generate unexpected locking dependency
> chain (like this report).
I do not agree with deprecating system-wide workqueues. I think that all
flush_workqueue(system_long_wq) calls should be reviewed since these are
deadlock-prone.
Thanks,
Bart.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists