From: Xianpeng Zhao <xpzhao@aerohive.com>
To: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [linux-kernel] dead loop for rtnl_trylock
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 10:31:53 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CY1PR11MB0491C022AD738CCC818BE74AAAAD0@CY1PR11MB0491.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
Hi Group,
I have find a problem in my system, I found there have a chance that cause the system enter dead loop when try to get the rtnl lock in the sysctl function in net/ipv6/addrconf.c
The situation should like this, there are 2 processes may need get the rtnl lock, we call them process A and process B, A have high priority than B.
B need get the rtnl lock to do something, when B schedule out without release the lock; At this time, the A start to run "echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/<ifname>/disable_ipv6", the echo process will run to this code:
if (!rtnl_trylock())
return restart_syscall();
Because the rtnl lock was hold by process B, so here the try will be failure, and run the restart_syscall to let the sys_write do again, even try many times, because the B have very lower priority, the lock was hard to be released, so the echo process created by A will enter a loop of restart system call.
In my case it is the wireless_nlevent_process in process kworker taken the rtnl lock, and another higher priority process need use echo to disable IPv6 met this problem.
I am not very sure, but I think it is better to let the process A sleep a while instead of try it again and again without any delay.
Expects, what's your opinions?
@@ -5304,8 +5308,10 @@ static int addrconf_disable_ipv6(struct ctl_table *table, int *p, int newf)
struct net *net;
int old;
- if (!rtnl_trylock())
+ if (!rtnl_trylock()){
+ schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(HZ/4);
return restart_syscall();
+ }
net = (struct net *)table->extra2;
old = *p;
next reply other threads:[~2016-02-16 10:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-16 10:31 Xianpeng Zhao [this message]
2016-02-22 9:39 ` Eric W. Biederman
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=CY1PR11MB0491C022AD738CCC818BE74AAAAD0@CY1PR11MB0491.namprd11.prod.outlook.com \
--to=xpzhao@aerohive.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®