Re: WARNING: syz-executor still has locks held!

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On 03/20, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 20-03-19 14:24:11, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 03/20, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > >
> > > Yes we do hold the cgred mutex while calling freezable_schedule but why
> > > are we getting a warning is not really clear to me. The task should be
> > > hidden from the freezer so why do we warn at all?
> >
> > try_to_freeze() calls debug_check_no_locks_held() and this makes sense.
> Yes it does. But it already ignores PF_NOFREEZE tasks and I fail to see
> why is PF_FREEZER_SKIP any different.

But they differ. PF_NOFREEZE is a "sticky" flag for kthreads. Set by default,
cleared by set_freezable() if you want a freezable kthread.

PF_FREEZER_SKIP means that a sleeping freezable task will call try_to_freeze()
right after schedule() returns, so try_to_freeze_tasks() can safely count it as
"already frozen".

> it seems that skipping the task was the only viable option
> to fix suspend issues

Yes, de_thread() should use freezable_schedule(), iow I hope we will reconsider
this (reverted) patch.

> as removing the cgred is way way too complicated.

We need to do this anyway, this leads to other more serious problems...


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux