On Monday October 9, [email protected] wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-10-09 at 11:00 +1000, Neil Brown wrote:
> > On Friday October 6, [email protected] wrote:
> > >
> > > Stick NFS sockets in their own class to avoid some lockdep warnings.
> > > NFS sockets are never exposed to user-space, and will hence not trigger
> > > certain code paths that would otherwise pose deadlock scenarios.
> >
> > I'm a bit bothered that the changelog entry does mention what sort of
> > lockdep warning are begin avoided,
>
> These:
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/7/13/84
Wouldn't have hurt to have that link in the changelog... or maybe an
excerpt?
That is very much an nfs-client issue, so reclassifying the
server-side sockets seems irrelevant. Doesn't cause any harm though I
suppose.
>
> > and that 'svc_reclassify_socket'
> > doesn't contain the work 'lock', yet is it really the locks that are
> > being reclassified.
>
> Hmm, good point, shall I do s/reclassify_socket/reclassify_sock_lock/ ?
>
If you want to keep that function, then yes.
Thanks,
NeilBrown
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[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]
