mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ulrich Weigand" <Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com>
To: "Manfred Spraul" <manfred@colorfullife.com>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: NFS deadlock explained (on S/390)
Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2001 14:35:43 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <OFED05871E.27F0F7FB-ONC1256ABC.0042AF59@de.ibm.com> (raw)


Manfred Spraul:

>I think in_irq() and in_interrupt() should check the cpu interrupt flag
>and return TRUE if the per-cpu interrupts are disabled.
>
>The current behavious is just weird:
>    spin_lock_bh();
>    in_interrupt(); --> true
>    spin_unlock_bh();
>    spin_lock_irq();
>    in_interrupt(); --> false
>    spin_unlock_irq();

I see.  Instead of checking the interrupt flag in in_irq(), spin_lock_irq
could also simply increment the local_irq_count, just like spin_lock_bh
increments the local_bh_count.

>> Whether this same situation can explain the deadlocks seen on
>> other platforms depends on whether the drivers used there exhibit
>> similar locking behaviours as the QDIO driver, of course.
>
>It should be possible to detect that automatically: if
>dev_kfree_skb_any() is called outside irq context with disabled per-cpu
>interrupts then it's probably due to a spin_lock_irq() and could
>deadlock.

This would definitely solve the deadlock in our case.  However, I'm not
sure this doesn't have some adverse effect on other code; e.g. there are
quite a few routines that use if (!in_interrupt()) as a bug-check, and
some might possibly be called from inside a spin_lock_irq ...



Mit freundlichen Gruessen / Best Regards

Ulrich Weigand

--
  Dr. Ulrich Weigand
  Linux for S/390 Design & Development
  IBM Deutschland Entwicklung GmbH, Schoenaicher Str. 220, 71032 Boeblingen
  Phone: +49-7031/16-3727   ---   Email: Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com


             reply	other threads:[~2001-09-03 12:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-09-03 12:35 Ulrich Weigand [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-08-31 18:02 Manfred Spraul
2001-08-31 16:14 Ulrich Weigand

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=OFED05871E.27F0F7FB-ONC1256ABC.0042AF59@de.ibm.com \
    --to=ulrich.weigand@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=manfred@colorfullife.com \
    /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®