lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Jun]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/1] rtmutex: Handle when top lock owner changes
On Wed, 4 Jun 2014 08:05:25 -0500
"Brad Mouring" <bmouring@ni.com> wrote:

> A->L2
>
> This is a slight variation on what I was seeing. To use the nomenclature
> that you proposed at the start, rewinding to the point
>
> A->L2->B->L3->C->L4->D
>
> Let's assume things continue to unfold as you explain. Task is D,
> top_waiter is C. A is scheduled out and the chain shuffles.
>
> A->L2->B
> C->L4->D->'

But isn't that a lock ordering problem there?

If B can block on L3 owned by C, I see the following:

B->L3->C->L4->D->L2->B

Deadlock!

In my scenario I was very careful to point out that the lock ordering
was: L1->L2->L3->L4

But you show that we can have both:

L2-> ... ->L4

and

L4-> ... ->L2

Which is a reverse of lock ordering and a possible deadlock can occur.

-- Steve


>
> So, we now have D blocking on L2 and L4 has waiters, C again. Also,
> since the codepath to have C block on L4 again is the same as the
> codepath from when it blocked on it in the first place, the location
> is the same since the stack (for what we care about) is the same.
>


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-06-04 17:01    [W:0.125 / U:0.408 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site