On Mon, 2007-08-06 at 14:53 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > But this makes ->lockdep_map meaningless? We always take wq->lockdep_map > for reading, now we can't detect deadlocks. > > read_lock(A); > lock(B); > > vs > lock(B); > read_lock(A); > > is valid, kernel/lockdep.c should not complain. Ah, hmm. Good point, I guess you can always have multiple read locks. Then we'd have to make a new parameter or such to get rid of the recursive locking try message. But if you want to deprecate the API anyway then this is a good way to find it. johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- References:
- 2.6.23-rc1-mm2
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: 2.6.23-rc1-mm2
- From: Marc Dietrich <[email protected]>
- Re: 2.6.23-rc1-mm2
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [NFS] 2.6.23-rc1-mm2
- From: Trond Myklebust <[email protected]>
- Re: [NFS] 2.6.23-rc1-mm2
- From: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
- Re: [NFS] 2.6.23-rc1-mm2
- From: Johannes Berg <[email protected]>
- Re: [NFS] 2.6.23-rc1-mm2
- From: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
- 2.6.23-rc1-mm2
- Prev by Date: Re: [NFS] 2.6.23-rc1-mm2
- Next by Date: Re: [patch 03/11] fuse: add reference counting to fuse_file
- Previous by thread: Re: [NFS] 2.6.23-rc1-mm2
- Next by thread: Re: [NFS] 2.6.23-rc1-mm2
- Index(es):