From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Jun 17 15:02:32 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 13D7737B401; Tue, 17 Jun 2003 15:02:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id A9F4043F93; Tue, 17 Jun 2003 15:02:31 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from bright@elvis.mu.org)
Received: by elvis.mu.org (Postfix, from userid 1192)
	id 870BF2ED412; Tue, 17 Jun 2003 15:02:31 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 15:02:31 -0700
From: Alfred Perlstein <alfred@FreeBSD.org>
To: Don Lewis <truckman@FreeBSD.org>
Message-ID: <20030617220231.GV62025@elvis.mu.org>
References: <20030617190735.GU62025@elvis.mu.org>
	<200306172006.h5HK6lM7052632@gw.catspoiler.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <200306172006.h5HK6lM7052632@gw.catspoiler.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
cc: current@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: Giant pushdown in kern_descrip.c rev 1.128
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 22:02:32 -0000

* Don Lewis <truckman@FreeBSD.org> [030617 13:06] wrote:
> On 17 Jun, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> > * Don Lewis <truckman@FreeBSD.org> [030617 12:00] wrote:
> >> It's not legal to attempt to aquire Giant in fdrop_locked(), while
> >> FILE_LOCK() is held.  The problem is that FILE_LOCK uses the mutex pool,
> >> which should only be used for leaf mutexes.
> >> 
> >> It also looks like there is a potential for a lock order reversal if
> >> some callers aquire Giant before FILE_LOCK() and fdrop_locked() does the
> >> opposite.
> >> 
> >> It also appears that witness ignores the mutex pool ...
> > 
> > Yes, but I think the fix is as simple as just dropping the FILE_LOCK
> > after the decrement as we're the last holders of it, can you try
> > this:
> 
> I like simple fixes, especially when the code shrinks ;-)
> 
> Unfortunately, I think your point about this only happening because this
> process is the last holder of the file means that this doesn't explain
> Peter's deadlock.

You can still deadlock because another file's mutex may hash to the same
location.