Re: [RFC/PATCH] debug workqueue deadlocks with lockdep

[Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>]

On Wed, 2007-07-04 at 14:21 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:

> well, in this case the lock/unlock should nest perfectly (i.e. it should 
> always be balanced perfectly), so indeed calling with nested==1 leads to 
> stricter checking.
> 
> non-nested unlocks occur when people do stuff like:
> 
> 	spin_lock(&lock1);
> 	spin_lock(&lock2);
> 	spin_unlock(&lock1);
> 	spin_unlock(&lock2);
> 
> the first unlock is not 'nested perfectly'. Now for the workqueue 
> dep_map this shouldnt be a legal combination, right?

I don't think so, will change to use nested==1.

johannes

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