Re: 2.6.9-rc2 hangs in posix_locks_deadlock

From: Vladimir B. Savkin
Date: Sat Oct 30 2004 - 05:45:57 EST


On Sun, Sep 19, 2004 at 03:51:43PM -0700, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> Hmm... It appears that it is indeed possible for both leases and flocks
> to be on the global "blocked_list", so the appended check is *not*
> redundant.
> Since flocks in particular do not initialize fl_owner, I suspect that
> you might be seeing wierd loops that were previously being avoided due
> to the ->fl_pid checks...

I just noticed that this fix didn't make it into 2.6.9.

> [PATCH] fix posix_locks_deadlock().
>
> "blocked_list" may contain both leases and flock locks. Since the latter in
> particular do not initialize the fl_owner field, we have to beware not to
> call posix_same_owner() on them.
>
> Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> locks.c | 7 +++----
> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> Index: linux-2.6.9-rc2-up/fs/locks.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.9-rc2-up.orig/fs/locks.c 2004-09-19 13:55:33.680258334 -0700
> +++ linux-2.6.9-rc2-up/fs/locks.c 2004-09-19 15:37:32.595634679 -0700
> @@ -634,14 +634,13 @@
> int posix_locks_deadlock(struct file_lock *caller_fl,
> struct file_lock *block_fl)
> {
> - struct list_head *tmp;
> + struct file_lock *fl;
>
> next_task:
> if (posix_same_owner(caller_fl, block_fl))
> return 1;
> - list_for_each(tmp, &blocked_list) {
> - struct file_lock *fl = list_entry(tmp, struct file_lock, fl_link);
> - if (posix_same_owner(fl, block_fl)) {
> + list_for_each_entry(fl, &blocked_list, fl_link) {
> + if (IS_POSIX(fl) && posix_same_owner(fl, block_fl)) {
> fl = fl->fl_next;
> block_fl = fl;
> goto next_task;

~
:wq
With best regards,
Vladimir Savkin.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/