Re: [PATCH v3 02/16] freezer: add unsafe versions of freezablehelpers for CIFS

[Pavel Machek]

On Mon 2013-05-06 16:50:07, Colin Cross wrote:
> CIFS calls wait_event_freezekillable_unsafe with a VFS lock held,
> which is unsafe and will cause lockdep warnings when 6aa9707
> "lockdep: check that no locks held at freeze time" is reapplied
> (it was reverted in dbf520a).  CIFS shouldn't be doing this, but
> it has long-running syscalls that must hold a lock but also
> shouldn't block suspend.  Until CIFS freeze handling is rewritten
> to use a signal to exit out of the critical section, add a new
> wait_event_freezekillable_unsafe helper that will not run the
> lockdep test when 6aa9707 is reapplied, and call it from CIFS.
> 
> In practice the likley result of holding the lock while freezing
> is that a second task blocked on the lock will never freeze,
> aborting suspend, but it is possible to manufacture a case using
> the cgroup freezer, the lock, and the suspend freezer to create
> a deadlock.  Silencing the lockdep warning here will allow
> problems to be found in other drivers that may have a more
> serious deadlock risk, and prevent new problems from being added.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Colin Cross <ccross@xxxxxxxxxxx>

Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx>

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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/