LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@in.ibm.com>
To: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>
Cc: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
Benjamin Gilbert <bgilbert@cs.cmu.edu>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Gautham shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>
Subject: Re: [patch -mm] slab: use CPU_LOCK_[ACQUIRE|RELEASE]
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 08:00:05 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070111023005.GA5357@in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0701101012460.21379@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
On Wed, Jan 10, 2007 at 10:20:28AM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> I have got a bad feeling about upcoming deadlock problems when looking at
> the mutex_lock / unlock code in cpuup_callback in slab.c. Branches
> that just obtain a lock or release a lock? I hope there is some
> control of what happens between lock acquisition and release?
A cpu hotplug should happen between LOCK_ACQUIRE/RELEASE
> You are aware that this lock is taken for cache shrinking/destroy, tuning
> of cpu cache sizes, proc output and cache creation? Any of those run on
> the same processor should cause a deadlock.
Why? mutex_lock() taken in LOCK_ACQ will just block those functions
(cache create etc) from proceeding simultaneously as a hotplug event.
This per-subsystem mutex_lock() is supposed to be a replacement for the global
lock_cpu_hotplug() lock ..
But the whole thing is changing again ..we will likely move towards a
process freezer based cpu hotplug locking ..all the lock_cpu_hotplugs()
and the existing LOCK_ACQ/RELS can go away when we do that ..
--
Regards,
vatsa
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-01-11 2:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-01-08 17:07 Failure to release lock after CPU hot-unplug canceled Benjamin Gilbert
2007-01-09 12:17 ` Heiko Carstens
2007-01-09 12:27 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2007-01-09 15:03 ` Heiko Carstens
2007-01-09 15:05 ` [patch -mm] call cpu_chain with CPU_DOWN_FAILED if CPU_DOWN_PREPARE failed Heiko Carstens
2007-01-09 15:06 ` [patch -mm] slab: use CPU_LOCK_[ACQUIRE|RELEASE] Heiko Carstens
2007-01-10 18:20 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-01-11 2:30 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri [this message]
2007-01-09 16:34 ` Failure to release lock after CPU hot-unplug canceled Benjamin Gilbert
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20070111023005.GA5357@in.ibm.com \
--to=vatsa@in.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=bgilbert@cs.cmu.edu \
--cc=clameter@sgi.com \
--cc=ego@in.ibm.com \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=penberg@cs.helsinki.fi \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).