Re: possible recursive locking in ATM layer

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Arjan van de Ven wrote:

From: Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]>

> Linux version 2.6.17-git22 (duncan@baldrick) (gcc version 4.0.3 (Ubuntu 4.0.3-1ubuntu5)) #20 PREEMPT Tue Jul 4 10:35:04 CEST 2006

>
> [ 2381.598609] =============================================
> [ 2381.619314] [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
> [ 2381.635497] ---------------------------------------------
> [ 2381.651706] atmarpd/2696 is trying to acquire lock:
> [ 2381.666354] (&skb_queue_lock_key){-+..}, at: [<c028c540>] skb_migrate+0x24/0x6c
> [ 2381.688848]


ok this is a real potential deadlock in a way, it takes two locks of 2
skbuffs without doing any kind of lock ordering; I think the following
patch should fix it. Just sort the lock taking order by address of the
skb.. it's not pretty but it's the best this can do in a minimally
invasive way.


Isn't it a deadlock only if skb_migrate(a, b) and skb_migrate(b, a) can be called concurrently?

--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

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

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux