Re: [PATCH] slub: Fix sysfs circular locking dependency

[Pekka Enberg]

On Sat, 2011-01-08 at 08:42 +0100, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 9:34 PM, David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 7 Jan 2011, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> >
> > > Subject: slub: Avoid use of slub_lock in show_slab_objects()
> > >
> > > The purpose of the locking is to prevent removal and additions
> > > of nodes when statistics are gathered for a slab cache. So we
> > > need to avoid racing with memory hotplug functionality.
> > >
> > > It is enough to take the memory hotplug locks there instead
> > > of the slub_lock.
> > >
> >
> > Because memory hotplug is the only time s->node[] is modified after the
> > sysfs files are created, which is the only time show_slab_objects() is
> > called.
> >
> > > online_pages() does not acquire the memory_hotplug lock. So
> > > add the missing locking there.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> >  [ Should probably be seperated out into two patches, one for the
> >   memory hotplug locking addition and one for the slub fix, both
> >   should be pushed during this merge window.  If so, a comment
> >   describing the new semantics of lock_memory_hotplug() to protect
> >   data structures that may be modified in hotplug notifier
> >   callbacks would be appreciated. ]
> 
> Shouldn't stable@xxxxxxxxxx be CC-ed too ?

Yup, I'll add it to the patch.

--
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/