Re: [RFC PATCH v2 01/10] CPU hotplug: Provide APIs for "light"atomic readers to prevent CPU offline

From: Oleg Nesterov
Date: Fri Dec 07 2012 - 15:59:16 EST

On 12/08, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> On 12/08/2012 01:26 AM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > Not sure I undestand... I simply meant that, say,
> > get_online_cpus_atomic() under task->pi_lock can obviously deadlock
> > with take_cpu_down() which can want the same task->pi_lock after
> > disable_atomic_reader().
> Right, I mistook your point for something else (i.e., ability for
> the writer to do get_online_cpus_atomic() safely, which I fixed in
> v3).
> So, your point above is very valid. And yes, we can't do much
> about it, we'll just have to teach lockdep to catch such usages.

Afaics, this is simple. Just add the "fake" lockdep_map as, say,
lglock does. Except, you need rwlock_acquire_read(map, 0, 1, IP)
because this lock is recursive.

But. There is another email from you about the possible deadlock.
I'll write the reply in a minute...


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at