* possible race in end_buffer_io_async()
@ 2001-09-21 22:46 tpepper
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: tpepper @ 2001-09-21 22:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
I've got a setup here that is triggering the BUG() in UnlockPage() in
end_buffer_io_async(). Looking at the code in that function we noticed that:
When the put_bh() macro calls got added to fs/buffer.c's
end_buffer_io_async() they look like they got in slightly inconsistently.
If the code branches to still_busy it does:
put_bh(bh);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&page_uptodate_lock, flags);
If the branch is not taken it does:
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&page_uptodate_lock, flags);
put_bh(bh);
I don't know which is correct...There's either a possible race if the put_bh()
should be inside the lock (although since it's decrementing bh_count I doubt
it's what would be causing my attempt to unlock an unlocked page) or else
there are a few instructions that can be moved outside the lock.
I've been hunting around on the web and saw some discussion in July
about async I/O races between Andrea and Linus. Are these resolved?
I'm running 2.4.9 on the machine in question (w/ and w/o kgdb) trying
to figure out what's going on. I'm going to try the latest pre patches
this weekend since the 2.4.10-pre's include a big merge against Andrea.
Tim
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2001-09-21 22:46 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2001-09-21 22:46 possible race in end_buffer_io_async() tpepper
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®