Re: [patch] scalable timers implementation, 2.4.16, 2.5.0

From: Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
Date: Thu Dec 06 2001 - 04:10:43 EST

Next message: Chris Wedgwood: "Re: [PATCH] 2.5.1-pre5: per-cpu areas"
Previous message: Mark Hindley: "oops in 2.4.16"
In reply to: Rusty Russell: "Re: [patch] scalable timers implementation, 2.4.16, 2.5.0"
Next in thread: Andi Kleen: "Re: [patch] scalable timers implementation, 2.4.16, 2.5.0"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

> The deadlock you're referring to is, I assume, del_timer_sync() called
> inside the timer itself? Can you think of any other dangerous cases?

Any case where the timer handler and the calling code both want the same
lock. So for example timer based I/O completion polling will deadlock
against request code doing a del_timer_sync
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Chris Wedgwood: "Re: [PATCH] 2.5.1-pre5: per-cpu areas"
Previous message: Mark Hindley: "oops in 2.4.16"
In reply to: Rusty Russell: "Re: [patch] scalable timers implementation, 2.4.16, 2.5.0"
Next in thread: Andi Kleen: "Re: [patch] scalable timers implementation, 2.4.16, 2.5.0"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Dec 07 2001 - 21:00:33 EST