Torsten Kaiser wrote:
> On Nov 19, 2007 8:56 AM, Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> wrote:
>> * Torsten Kaiser <[email protected]> wrote:
...
> Above this acquire/release sequence is the following comment:
> #ifdef CONFIG_LOCKDEP
> /*
> * It is permissible to free the struct work_struct
> * from inside the function that is called from it,
> * this we need to take into account for lockdep too.
> * To avoid bogus "held lock freed" warnings as well
> * as problems when looking into work->lockdep_map,
> * make a copy and use that here.
> */
> struct lockdep_map lockdep_map = work->lockdep_map;
> #endif
>
> Did something trigger this anyway?
>
> Anything I could try, apart from more boots with slub_debug=F?
Please could you try which patch from the dm-crypt series cause this ?
(agk-dm-dm-crypt* names.)
I suspect agk-dm-dm-crypt-move-bio-submission-to-thread.patch because
there is one work struct used subsequently in two threads...
(io thread already started while crypt thread is processing lockdep_map
after calling f(work)...)
(btw these patches prepare dm-crypt for next patchset introducing
async cryptoapi, so there should be no functional changes yet.)
Milan
--
[email protected]
-
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]
