lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Dec]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH v3 1/9] CPU hotplug: Provide APIs to prevent CPU offline from atomic context
On 12/07, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
>
> 4. No deadlock possibilities
>
> Per-cpu locking is not the way to go if we want to have relaxed rules
> for lock-ordering. Because, we can end up in circular-locking dependencies
> as explained in https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/12/6/290

OK, but this assumes that, contrary to what Steven said, read-write-read
deadlock is not possible when it comes to rwlock_t. So far I think this
is true and we can't deadlock. Steven?

However. If this is true, then compared to preempt_disable/stop_machine
livelock is possible. Probably this is fine, we have the same problem with
get_online_cpus(). But if we can accept this fact I feel we can simmplify
this somehow... Can't prove, only feel ;)

Oleg.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-12-09 22:41    [W:0.177 / U:0.060 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site