Re: possible deadlock in generic_file_write_iter (2)

[Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>]

On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 6:05 AM, Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com> wrote:
>> > On 12/4/2017 5:33 PM, Jan Kara wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hello,
>> >>
>> >> adding Peter and Byungchul to CC since the lockdep report just looks
>> >> strange and cross-release seems to be involved. Guys, how did #5 get into
>> >> the lock chain and what does put_ucounts() have to do with sb_writers
>> >> there? Thanks!
>> >
>> >
>> > Hello Jan,
>> >
>> > In order to get full stack of #5, we have to pass a boot param,
>> > "crossrelease_fullstack", to the kernel. Now that it only informs
>> > put_ucounts() in the call trace, it's hard to find out what exactly
>> > happened at that time, but I can tell #5 shows:
>> >
>> > When acquire(sb_writers) in put_ucounts(), it was on the way to
>> > complete((completion)&req.done) of wait_for_completion() in
>> > devtmpfs_create_node().
>> >
>> > If acquire(sb_writers) in put_ucounts() is stuck, then
>> > wait_for_completion() in devtmpfs_create_node() would be also
>> > stuck, since complete() being in the context of acquire(sb_writers)
>> > cannot be called.
>> >
>> > This is why cross-release added the lock chain.
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> What is cross-release? Is it something new? Should we always enable
>> crossrelease_fullstack during testing?
>
> Hello Dmitry,
>
> Yes, it's new one making lockdep track wait_for_completion() as well.
>
> And we should enable crossrelease_fullstack if you don't care system
> slowdown but testing.

I've enabled CONFIG_BOOTPARAM_LOCKDEP_CROSSRELEASE_FULLSTACK. It
should have the same effect, right?

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>