On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 04:22:01PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Apr 2014 15:49:42 +1000 Dave Chinner wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 02:03:36PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> > > lockdep reports a locking chain
> > >
> > > sk_lock-AF_INET --> rtnl_mutex --> pcpu_alloc_mutex
> > >
> >
On Wed, 16 Apr 2014 15:49:42 +1000 Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 02:03:36PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> > lockdep reports a locking chain
> >
> > sk_lock-AF_INET --> rtnl_mutex --> pcpu_alloc_mutex
> >
> > As sk_lock may be needed to reclaim memory, allowing that
> > reclaim whi
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 02:03:36PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> lockdep reports a locking chain
>
> sk_lock-AF_INET --> rtnl_mutex --> pcpu_alloc_mutex
>
> As sk_lock may be needed to reclaim memory, allowing that
> reclaim while pcu_alloc_mutex is held can lead to deadlock.
> So set PF_FSTRANS wh
lockdep reports a locking chain
sk_lock-AF_INET --> rtnl_mutex --> pcpu_alloc_mutex
As sk_lock may be needed to reclaim memory, allowing that
reclaim while pcu_alloc_mutex is held can lead to deadlock.
So set PF_FSTRANS while it is help to avoid the FS reclaim.
pcpu_alloc_mutex can be taken wh
4 matches
Mail list logo