Re: [NFS] 2.6.23-rc1-mm2

On Mon, 2007-08-06 at 14:53 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:

> But this makes ->lockdep_map meaningless? We always take wq->lockdep_map
> for reading, now we can't detect deadlocks.
> 
> 	read_lock(A);
> 	lock(B);
> 
> vs
> 	lock(B);
> 	read_lock(A);
> 
> is valid, kernel/lockdep.c should not complain.

Ah, hmm. Good point, I guess you can always have multiple read locks.
Then we'd have to make a new parameter or such to get rid of the
recursive locking try message. But if you want to deprecate the API
anyway then this is a good way to find it.

johannes

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

---

• References:
  • 2.6.23-rc1-mm2
    • From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
  • Re: 2.6.23-rc1-mm2
    • From: Marc Dietrich <[email protected]>
  • Re: 2.6.23-rc1-mm2
    • From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
  • Re: [NFS] 2.6.23-rc1-mm2
    • From: Trond Myklebust <[email protected]>
  • Re: [NFS] 2.6.23-rc1-mm2
    • From: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
  • Re: [NFS] 2.6.23-rc1-mm2
    • From: Johannes Berg <[email protected]>
  • Re: [NFS] 2.6.23-rc1-mm2
    • From: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [NFS] 2.6.23-rc1-mm2
• Next by Date: Re: [patch 03/11] fuse: add reference counting to fuse_file
• Previous by thread: Re: [NFS] 2.6.23-rc1-mm2
• Next by thread: Re: [NFS] 2.6.23-rc1-mm2
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]