On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 05:18:56PM +0200, Jarek Poplawski wrote:

On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 03:30:56PM +0200, Jiri Bohac wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 12:23:56PM +0000, Jarek Poplawski wrote:

quoted

On 2010-08-31 22:54, Jay Vosburgh wrote:

quoted

	What prevents this from deadlocking such that cpu A is in
bond_close, holding RTNL and in cancel_delayed_work_sync, while cpu B is
in the above function, trying to acquire RTNL?

I guess this one isn't cancelled in bond_close, so it should be safe.

Nah, Jay was correct. Although this work item is not explicitly
cancelled with cancel_delayed_work_sync(), it is on the same
workqueue as work items that are being cancelled with
cancel_delayed_work_sync(), so this can still cause a deadlock.
Fixed in the new version of the patch by putting these on a
separate workqueue.

Maybe I miss something, but the same workqueue shouldn't matter here.

Hmm... I missed your point completely and Jay was correct!

Sorry,
Jarek P.