From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750722AbWAYRPr (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jan 2006 12:15:47 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750703AbWAYRPr (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jan 2006 12:15:47 -0500 Received: from ms-smtp-01.nyroc.rr.com ([24.24.2.55]:24020 "EHLO ms-smtp-01.nyroc.rr.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750722AbWAYRPq (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jan 2006 12:15:46 -0500 Subject: Re: [patch, validator] fix proc_subdir_lock related deadlock From: Steven Rostedt To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20060125170331.GA29339@elte.hu> References: <20060125170331.GA29339@elte.hu> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 12:14:43 -0500 Message-Id: <1138209283.6695.55.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2006-01-25 at 18:03 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > proc_subdir_lock can also be used from softirq (tasklet) context, which > may lead to deadlocks. > > This bug was found via the lock validator: > Thanks Ingo, I stressed in sending the patch that there was a big assumption that the calls would not be done in (soft)irq context. I just didn't want to add overhead if it wasn't needed. But I guess that this is needed until we can remove all the instances that use it in softirq context. But that's for a later patch. Acked-by: Steven Rostedt -- Steve