Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 11 Nov 2011 09:02:08 -0600 (CST) | From | Christoph Lameter <> | Subject | Re: INFO: possible recursive locking detected: get_partial_node() on 3.2-rc1 |
| |
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011, Shaohua Li wrote:
> Looks this could be a real dead lock. we hold a lock to free a object, > but the free need allocate a new object. if the new object and the freed > object are from the same slab, there is a deadlock.
unfreeze partials is never called when going through get_partial_node() so there is no deadlock AFAICT.
> discard_slab() doesn't need hold the lock if the slab is already removed > from partial list. how about below patch, only compile tested.
In general I think it is good to move the call to discard_slab() out from under the list_lock in unfreeze_partials(). Could you fold discard_page_list into unfreeze_partials()? __flush_cpu_slab still calls discard_page_list with disabled interrupts even after your patch.
| |