Re: [-mm patch] lockdep: possible deadlock in sysfs

Am Freitag, 5. Januar 2007 13:16 schrieb Frederik Deweerdt:
> This is due to sysfs_hash_and_remove() holding dir->d_inode->i_mutex
> before calling sysfs_drop_dentry() which calls orphan_all_buffers()
> which in turn takes node->i_mutex.

This makes me wonder why it didn't deadlock during my tests.
I am investigating.

	Regards
		Oliver
-
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/

References:
- 2.6.20-rc3-mm1
  - From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- [-mm patch] lockdep: possible deadlock in sysfs
  - From: Frederik Deweerdt <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: [BUG-RT] RTC has been stopped-> long delay during boot, soft reboot->GRUB fails to call getrtsecs()
Next by Date: Re: "svc: unknown version (3)" when CONFIG_NFSD_V4=y
Previous by thread: [-mm patch] lockdep: possible deadlock in sysfs
Next by thread: Re: [-mm patch] lockdep: possible deadlock in sysfs
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]