Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 16 Feb 2003 14:27:40 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 16 Feb 2003 14:27:40 -0500 Received: from dbl.q-ag.de ([80.146.160.66]:14527 "EHLO dbl.q-ag.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 16 Feb 2003 14:27:39 -0500 Message-ID: <3E4FE86D.1010708@colorfullife.com> Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 20:37:17 +0100 From: Manfred Spraul User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2) Gecko/20021202 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linus Torvalds CC: "Martin J. Bligh" , Anton Blanchard , Andrew Morton , Kernel Mailing List , Zwane Mwaikambo Subject: Re: more signal locking bugs? References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 867 Lines: 26 Linus Torvalds wrote: >In short, everything really seems to be pointing that way: the current >task lock simply _is_ broken, and has apparently always been broken (but >the ABBA deadlock is just extremely rare in practice, since you have to >get an interrupt at just the right point on one CPU, while you have the AB >case on another).\ > ABBA is not a deadlock, because linux read_locks permit recursive calls. read_lock(tasklist_lock); task_lock(tsk); read_lock(tasklist_lock); Does not deadlock, nor any other ordering. The tasklist_lock is never taken for write from bh or irq context. -- Manfred - 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/