Re: 2.6.17-rc5-mm3: bad unlock ordering (reiser4?)

[Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu]

On Sun, 04 Jun 2006 13:33:26 PDT, Andrew Morton said:

> Why does the locking validator complain about unlocking ordering?

Presumably, if the lock nesting *should* be "take A, take B, release B,
release A", if it sees "Take A, Take B, release A" it means there's
potentially a missing 'release B' that got forgotten (most likely an
error case that does a 'return;' instead of a 'goto end_of_function_cleanup'
like we usually code.

Having said that, I'm not sure it qualifies as a "BUG".  Certainly would
qualify for a "SMELLS_FISHY" though.  But we don't have one of those handy,
so maybe BUG is as good as it gets (given that the person who built the
kernel *asked* to be nagged about locking funkyness)....

Attachment: pgpfOam8GJ4Fp.pgp
Description: PGP signature