lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jul]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateThu, 2 Jul 2009 10:39:01 -0700 (PDT)
FromLinus Torvalds <>
SubjectRe: Exiting with locks still held (was Re: [PATCH] kmemleak: Fix scheduling-while-atomic bug)


On Thu, 2 Jul 2009, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>
> Initially, the scan_mutex was acquired in kmemleak_open() and released
> in kmemleak_release() (corresponding to /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak
> operations). This was causing some lockdep reports when the file was
> closed from a different task than the one opening it. This patch moves
> the scan_mutex acquiring in kmemleak_write() or kmemleak_seq_show().

This is better, but not really how you are supposed to do it.

The whole seq-file thing is very much _designed_ for taking a lock at the
beginning of the operation, and releasing it at the end. It's a very
common pattern.

But you should _not_ do it in the "show" routine. If you do, you're always
going to be racy wrt lseek() and friends.

What you _should_ do is to take the lock in the "seq_start" routine, and
release it in "seq_stop". The "seq_show" routine may be called multiple
times in between.

For a trivial example, see the drivers/char/misc.c file. Note how it needs
to hold the lock over the whole list traversal, and how seqfiles allows it
to do that quite naturally.

Linus


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-07-02 19:43    [from the cache]
©2003-2009