Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | From | Dawson Engler <> | Subject | Re: [CHECKER] more potential deadlocks | Date | Wed, 12 Mar 2003 00:28:46 -0800 (PST) |
| |
> James Morris writes: > > BUG: seems like it, if they can point to the same thing. ERROR: 1 thread deadlock. > > <struct in_device.lock (<local>:0)>-><struct ip_mc_list.lock (<local>:0)> occurred 5 times > > <struct ip_mc_list.lock (<local>:0)>-><struct in_device.lock (<local>:0)> occurred 5 times > > See below. > > > BUG? very hard to follow, but interesting if a real bug. unfortunately, > > could also be a false positive because of > > 1. infeasible callchain path or > > > > 2. the various in_dev and im pointers never actually point to > > the same object. > > > > requires three threads: > > thread 1: acquires im->lock then tries to get inetdev_lock > > thread 2: acquires inetdev_lock and tries to get in_dev->lock. > > thread 3: acquires in_dev->lock and tries to get im->lock. > > > > ERROR: 2 thread deadlock. > > <struct ip_mc_list.lock (<local>:0)>-><&inetdev_lock> occurred 5 times > > <&inetdev_lock>-><struct ip_mc_list.lock (<local>:0)> occurred 4 times > > These are indeed potential deadlock cases, caused by holding im->lock for > too long, now fixed by Alexey (in 2.5 bk at least).
great! Thanks very much for the feedback. I'd given up on anyone looking at these.
If people are interested, I can release more deadlock bugs pretty easily.
Dawson - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |