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

2007-01-05 Thread Oliver Neukum
Am Freitag, 5. Januar 2007 17:42 schrieb Frederik Deweerdt: > On Fri, Jan 05, 2007 at 04:13:25PM +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > Am Freitag, 5. Januar 2007 13:16 schrieb Frederik Deweerdt: > > > On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 10:02:00PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > ftp://f

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

2007-01-05 Thread Frederik Deweerdt
On Fri, Jan 05, 2007 at 04:13:25PM +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote: > Am Freitag, 5. Januar 2007 13:16 schrieb Frederik Deweerdt: > > On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 10:02:00PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > > > > > > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.20-rc3/2.6.20-rc3-m

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

2007-01-05 Thread Oliver Neukum
Am Freitag, 5. Januar 2007 13:16 schrieb Frederik Deweerdt: > On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 10:02:00PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > > > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.20-rc3/2.6.20-rc3-mm1/ > > > Hi, > > Lockdep issues the following warning: > [9.0640

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

2007-01-05 Thread Oliver Neukum
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.