Received: by 2002:a5b:505:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id o5csp5682651ybp; Tue, 8 Oct 2019 06:51:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwWSK1OG5+TD7yW3ETcoUoO1rviauEc6JlYdo8jnUDqAuZIVak4ZK7H1ERMLwiqiijxZ4N7 X-Received: by 2002:a50:d903:: with SMTP id t3mr33447649edj.117.1570542678130; Tue, 08 Oct 2019 06:51:18 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1570542678; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=W22S4kqEFledXG9ZVXx81dwcVkJTwK4IuYQtJP4vKgp0HdRIrOBhcOjKBetpsozaWK +f4UhkZM2yqD4K3yMw6iyr76RgwWgdIyntdKflgyeXL2/2n+MDsh53iUYkGU6P7bHXsp tpEZTvXz9Hzbw+V7eERUONnaoYWt0+mUGKCfWC2NpImZWbwS6JCgiehSVtg+vqxUnXe7 PAlb78YZScEXQQ7vZXH25ZERgpLblG/vBi3LcxYq9YXovA4/1ALjs4SaByvdHzd8+tYf Ac7xE2y1S5/fMJPAeVQTHgp/XVYlOqth2mcbMk3hvbRTdSQLIeeowB6u9rgON6FtEagW WLdQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date; bh=JV5u5rGK6v1thhMvv7pSJOuyqEthdOmyCgNvUSL+/cQ=; b=gBdR4SHPEmZ3LnLuy1s6XhTIQ8U/hjojhWKkvXw8WWIp9gvjPiierAqMb/WPbMx3pt ESaeULYiL1niXpX+lPf466KRYGq0AwHra/oIRNjPwwO4joTtH/I9EVq515I2y6EQCQeM OdZ5Bn+OA0KLlyKC6WudLm9EZ+OA9gJjI7y7dFYwqxHbXfYu9iZ7RWY8Z5d6n9BbmstO e1zo2eN+BFzQtSpA7K3HgeULwdwM98NTuw9JI4vQLdEW5/I1T++hsW/w4wILtCEErwDA 3eSMyHbJGU7bhMI/u2XmZjgGtFEcGidsSIPtZkBRoSxzk/pZszPq62fmyV+ltoZH8Dd4 KH4A== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id x30si10246306edi.351.2019.10.08.06.50.54; Tue, 08 Oct 2019 06:51:18 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725900AbfJHNse (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 8 Oct 2019 09:48:34 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:45350 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725834AbfJHNse (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Oct 2019 09:48:34 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13FFBB1AC; Tue, 8 Oct 2019 13:48:32 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2019 15:48:31 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Petr Mladek Cc: Qian Cai , Steven Rostedt , sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com, peterz@infradead.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, john.ogness@linutronix.de, akpm@linux-foundation.org, david@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm/page_isolation: fix a deadlock with printk() Message-ID: <20191008134831.GL6681@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <1570228005-24979-1-git-send-email-cai@lca.pw> <20191007143002.l37bt2lzqtnqjqxu@pathway.suse.cz> <1570460350.5576.290.camel@lca.pw> <20191007151237.GP2381@dhcp22.suse.cz> <1570462407.5576.292.camel@lca.pw> <20191008081510.ptwmb7zflqiup5py@pathway.suse.cz> <20191008091349.6195830d@gandalf.local.home> <1570541032.5576.297.camel@lca.pw> <20191008134256.5ti6rjkvadn5b5q4@pathway.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191008134256.5ti6rjkvadn5b5q4@pathway.suse.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue 08-10-19 15:42:56, Petr Mladek wrote: [...] > I am not -mm maintainer so I could not guarantee that a patch > using printk_deferred() will get accepted. But it will have much > bigger chance than the original patch. I am not going to ack any such patch until it is clear what is the actual problem. The disucssion in this thread boils down to point to lockdep splats which are most likely false possitives and there is no clear evidence that the is any actual deadlock as those would be clearly identifiable if the zone->lock or any other spinlock spinlock were participating. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs