lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Mar]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [CHECKER] more potential deadlocks
Date
> James Morris writes:
> > BUG: seems like it, if they can point to the same thing. ERROR: 1 thread deadlock.
> > <struct in_device.lock (<local>:0)>-><struct ip_mc_list.lock (<local>:0)> occurred 5 times
> > <struct ip_mc_list.lock (<local>:0)>-><struct in_device.lock (<local>:0)> occurred 5 times
>
> See below.
>
> > BUG? very hard to follow, but interesting if a real bug. unfortunately,
> > could also be a false positive because of
> > 1. infeasible callchain path or
> >
> > 2. the various in_dev and im pointers never actually point to
> > the same object.
> >
> > requires three threads:
> > thread 1: acquires im->lock then tries to get inetdev_lock
> > thread 2: acquires inetdev_lock and tries to get in_dev->lock.
> > thread 3: acquires in_dev->lock and tries to get im->lock.
> >
> > ERROR: 2 thread deadlock.
> > <struct ip_mc_list.lock (<local>:0)>-><&inetdev_lock> occurred 5 times
> > <&inetdev_lock>-><struct ip_mc_list.lock (<local>:0)> occurred 4 times
>
> These are indeed potential deadlock cases, caused by holding im->lock for
> too long, now fixed by Alexey (in 2.5 bk at least).

great! Thanks very much for the feedback. I'd given up on anyone
looking at these.

If people are interested, I can release more deadlock bugs pretty easily.

Dawson
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:33    [W:0.033 / U:0.532 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site