Re: [RFC, PATCH] locks: remove posix deadlock detection

On Sun, 2007-10-28 at 14:11 -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 06:40:52PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > so we need to fix the bugs - the lock usage and the looping. At that
> > point it merely becomes a performance concern to those who use it, which
> > is the proper behaviour. If you want a faster non-checking one use
> > flock(), or add another flag that is a Linux "don't check for deadlock"
> 
> You can't fix the false EDEADLK detection without solving the halting
> problem.  Best of luck with that.

I can see that it would be difficult to do efficiently, but basically,
this boils down to finding a circular path in a graph. That is hardly an
unsolvable issue...

Trond

-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [RFC, PATCH] locks: remove posix deadlock detection
    • From: Matthew Wilcox <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [RFC][PATCH] Fix hang in posix_locks_deadlock()
    • From: "George G. Davis" <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC][PATCH] Fix hang in posix_locks_deadlock()
    • From: "George G. Davis" <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC][PATCH] Fix hang in posix_locks_deadlock()
    • From: "J. Bruce Fields" <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC][PATCH] Fix hang in posix_locks_deadlock()
    • From: "J. Bruce Fields" <[email protected]>
  • [PATCH] locks: fix possible infinite loop in posix deadlock detection
    • From: "J. Bruce Fields" <[email protected]>
  • [RFC, PATCH] locks: remove posix deadlock detection
    • From: "J. Bruce Fields" <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC, PATCH] locks: remove posix deadlock detection
    • From: Matthew Wilcox <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC, PATCH] locks: remove posix deadlock detection
    • From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC, PATCH] locks: remove posix deadlock detection
    • From: Matthew Wilcox <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [RFC, PATCH] locks: remove posix deadlock detection
• Next by Date: Re: Linux Security *Module* Framework (Was: LSM conversion to static interface)
• Previous by thread: Re: [RFC, PATCH] locks: remove posix deadlock detection
• Next by thread: Re: [RFC, PATCH] locks: remove posix deadlock detection
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]