[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160902175206.GV2356@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2016 18:52:06 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@...eradapt.com>,
CAI Qian <caiqian@...hat.com>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>,
Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@...ileactivedefense.com>,
Eric Sandeen <esandeen@...hat.com>,
Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: possible circular locking dependency detected
On Fri, Sep 02, 2016 at 10:12:08AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 10:02 AM, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > It's very much _not_ just overlayfs being pathological - that it certainly is,
> > but the problem is much wider.
>
> Al, can you take a look at my two patches, and see if you agree that
> they fix it, though?
AFAICS, they should. Locking is obviously saner that way and AFAICS the
rest is absolutely straightforward.
Acked-by: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
> Of course, we now have *another* splice deadlock. That pipe inode is
> nasty, it's very easy to deadlock on it in subtle ways.
I'm still digging through iomap.c, but that's better taken to another branch
of this thread...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists