lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Oct]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC, PATCH] locks: remove posix deadlock detection
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007, Matthew Wilcox wrote:

> You can't fix the false EDEADLK detection without solving the halting
> problem. Best of luck with that.

Could you please elaborate a little bit more on this? I don't see how
detecting loops in graph relates to solving halting problem.

Of course the halting problem can be transformed to deadlock-detection
problem, but this relates to static code analysis, right? Not anything we
are interested in, i.e. tracking things in runtime and detecting loops in
simple dependency graphs.

--
Jiri Kosina
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-10-28 23:03    [W:0.209 / U:0.724 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site