Re: [PATCH 1/2] workqueue: debug flushing deadlocks with lockdep

On Thu, 2007-07-05 at 18:52 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:

> So I agree with you, such recursion is indeed bad. Can we forbid this?
> In that case this patch is even more perfect :)

I haven't seen it complain in a few days so that probably means such
usage is rather rare :)

johannes

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

References:
- [PATCH 0/2] workqueue lockup debugging
  - From: Johannes Berg <[email protected]>
- [PATCH 1/2] workqueue: debug flushing deadlocks with lockdep
  - From: Johannes Berg <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/2] workqueue: debug flushing deadlocks with lockdep
  - From: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/2] workqueue: debug flushing deadlocks with lockdep
  - From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/2] workqueue: debug flushing deadlocks with lockdep
  - From: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: can entire drivers/acorn subdirectory be removed?
Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 2/2] workqueue: debug work related deadlocks with lockdep
Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 1/2] workqueue: debug flushing deadlocks with lockdep
Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] X86: Update alignment when 4K stacks are used.
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]