lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Nov]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: yama: lockdep warning on yama_ptracer_del
Hi Kees,

On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 6:39 PM, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 8:10 PM, Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I was fuzzing with trinity within a KVM tools guest (lkvm) on a linux-next kernel, and got the
>> following dump which I believe to be noise due to how the timers work - but I'm not 100% sure.
>> ...
>> [ 954.674123] Possible interrupt unsafe locking scenario:
>> [ 954.674123]
>> [ 954.674123] CPU0 CPU1
>> [ 954.674123] ---- ----
>> [ 954.674123] lock(ptracer_relations_lock);
>> [ 954.674123] local_irq_disable();
>> [ 954.674123] lock(&(&new_timer->it_lock)->rlock);
>> [ 954.674123] lock(ptracer_relations_lock);
>> [ 954.674123] <Interrupt>
>> [ 954.674123] lock(&(&new_timer->it_lock)->rlock);
>> [ 954.674123]
>> [ 954.674123] *** DEADLOCK ***
>
> I've been wanting to get rid of the Yama ptracer_relations_lock
> anyway, so maybe I should do that now just to avoid this case at all?

I still see this one in -rc6, is there anything to get rid of it
before the release?


Thanks,
Sasha


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-11-19 05:41    [W:0.077 / U:0.472 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site