On 08/07, Trond Myklebust wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2007-08-08 at 02:20 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> > But. nfs4_renew_state() checks list_empty(&clp->cl_superblocks) under
> > clp->cl_sem? So, if it is possible that clp->cl_renewd was scheduled
> > at the time when nfs4_kill_renewd(), we can deadlock
On Wed, 2007-08-08 at 02:20 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> But. nfs4_renew_state() checks list_empty(&clp->cl_superblocks) under
> clp->cl_sem? So, if it is possible that clp->cl_renewd was scheduled
> at the time when nfs4_kill_renewd(), we can deadlock, no? Because
> nfs4_renew_state() needs clp-
On 08/07, Trond Myklebust wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2007-08-08 at 01:37 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 08/07, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 21:21 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > > On 08/03, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > > > > I'll have a look at this. I suspect that most if n
On Wed, 2007-08-08 at 01:37 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 08/07, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 21:21 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > On 08/03, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > > > I'll have a look at this. I suspect that most if not all of our calls to
> > > > run_workqueue()/
On 08/07, Trond Myklebust wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 21:21 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 08/03, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > > I'll have a look at this. I suspect that most if not all of our calls to
> > > run_workqueue()/flush_scheduled_work() can now be replaced by more
> > > targeted ca
On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 21:21 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 08/03, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > I'll have a look at this. I suspect that most if not all of our calls to
> > run_workqueue()/flush_scheduled_work() can now be replaced by more
> > targeted calls to cancel_work_sync() and cancel_delayed_
Am Monday 06 August 2007 18:24 schrieb Trond Myklebust:
> On Mon, 2007-08-06 at 13:05 +0200, Marc Dietrich wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > > (...)
> >
> > just booting into X is enough.
> >
> > I applied the patch, but now I get:
> >
> > =
> > [ INFO: inconsistent lock state
On Mon, 2007-08-06 at 13:05 +0200, Marc Dietrich wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am Monday 06 August 2007 08:24 schrieb Johannes Berg:
> > On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 21:21 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > To avoid a possible confusion: it is still OK if work->func() flushes
> > > its own workqueue, so strictly speak
On Mon, 2007-08-06 at 13:05 +0200, Marc Dietrich wrote:
> I applied the patch, but now I get:
>
> =
> [ INFO: inconsistent lock state ]
> 2.6.23-rc1-mm2 #4
> -
> inconsistent {softirq-on-W} -> {in-softirq-W} usage.
> swapper/0 [HC0[0
Hi,
Am Monday 06 August 2007 08:24 schrieb Johannes Berg:
> On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 21:21 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > To avoid a possible confusion: it is still OK if work->func() flushes
> > its own workqueue, so strictly speaking this trace is false positive,
> > but it would be very nice if
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
On 08/06, Johannes Berg wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 21:21 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> > To avoid a possible confusion: it is still OK if work->func() flushes
> > its own workqueue, so strictly speaking this trace is false positive,
> > but it would be very nice if we can get rid of this p
On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 21:21 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> To avoid a possible confusion: it is still OK if work->func() flushes
> its own workqueue, so strictly speaking this trace is false positive,
> but it would be very nice if we can get rid of this practice.
I just had a thought: we could ge
On 08/03, Trond Myklebust wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 09:38 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > stack backtrace:
> > > [] show_trace_log_lvl+0x1a/0x30
> > > [] show_trace+0x12/0x20
> > > [] dump_stack+0x15/0x20
> > > [] __lock_acquire+0xc22/0x1030
> > > [] lock_acquire+0x61/0x80
> > > [] f
On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 09:38 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Aug 2007 13:00:46 +0200 Marc Dietrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Am Wednesday 01 August 2007 08:09 schrieb Andrew Morton:
> > > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.23-rc1/2.
>
15 matches
Mail list logo
