Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753556AbaFDOQS (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jun 2014 10:16:18 -0400 Received: from cdptpa-outbound-snat.email.rr.com ([107.14.166.225]:3995 "EHLO cdptpa-oedge-vip.email.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753506AbaFDOQP (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jun 2014 10:16:15 -0400 Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 10:16:12 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt To: "Brad Mouring" Cc: linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , LKML , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Clark Williams Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] rtmutex: Handle when top lock owner changes Message-ID: <20140604101612.0d47b399@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <20140604130525.GA1621@linuxgetsreal> References: <1400855410-14773-1-git-send-email-brad.mouring@ni.com> <1400855410-14773-2-git-send-email-brad.mouring@ni.com> <20140603210609.62de6451@gandalf.local.home> <20140604130525.GA1621@linuxgetsreal> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.3 (GTK+ 2.24.23; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-RR-Connecting-IP: 107.14.168.118:25 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 4 Jun 2014 08:05:25 -0500 "Brad Mouring" wrote: > A->L2 > > This is a slight variation on what I was seeing. To use the nomenclature > that you proposed at the start, rewinding to the point > > A->L2->B->L3->C->L4->D > > Let's assume things continue to unfold as you explain. Task is D, > top_waiter is C. A is scheduled out and the chain shuffles. > > A->L2->B > C->L4->D->' But isn't that a lock ordering problem there? If B can block on L3 owned by C, I see the following: B->L3->C->L4->D->L2->B Deadlock! In my scenario I was very careful to point out that the lock ordering was: L1->L2->L3->L4 But you show that we can have both: L2-> ... ->L4 and L4-> ... ->L2 Which is a reverse of lock ordering and a possible deadlock can occur. -- Steve > > So, we now have D blocking on L2 and L4 has waiters, C again. Also, > since the codepath to have C block on L4 again is the same as the > codepath from when it blocked on it in the first place, the location > is the same since the stack (for what we care about) is the same. > -- 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/