Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 15 Jul 2015 15:26:12 -0700 | From | "Paul E. McKenney" <> | Subject | Re: cpu_hotplug vs oom_notify_list: possible circular locking dependency detected |
| |
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 04:48:24PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote: > On Tue, 14 Jul 2015, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > commit a1992f2f3b8e174d740a8f764d0d51344bed2eed > > Author: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > Date: Tue Jul 14 16:24:14 2015 -0700 > > > > rcu: Don't disable CPU hotplug during OOM notifiers > > > > RCU's rcu_oom_notify() disables CPU hotplug in order to stabilize the > > list of online CPUs, which it traverses. However, this is completely > > pointless because smp_call_function_single() will quietly fail if invoked > > on an offline CPU. Because the count of requests is incremented in the > > rcu_oom_notify_cpu() function that is remotely invoked, everything works > > nicely even in the face of concurrent CPU-hotplug operations. > > > > Furthermore, in recent kernels, invoking get_online_cpus() from an OOM > > notifier can result in deadlock. This commit therefore removes the > > call to get_online_cpus() and put_online_cpus() from rcu_oom_notify(). > > > > Reported-by: Marcin Ślusarz <marcin.slusarz@gmail.com> > > Reported-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> > > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Thank you!
Any news on whether or not it solves the problem?
Thanx, Paul
| |