lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Feb]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: lockdep warning
On Fri, 22 Feb 2008, Anders Eriksson wrote:

> > > Any chance that
> > > git revert 69cc64d8d92
> > > makes this report go away?
> I've tested the patch and I no longer get that lock thing in my syslog.

Thanks for verification.

Hmm, I don't immediately see how this patch could make neigh->lock owner
to change between lock and unlock ... I have skimmed through the solicit
methods, and they don't seem to be doing anything nasty to neigh ...

The scenario I was thinking about is that before 69cc64d8d92, if any of
the _solicit methods could do anything bad to neigh struct, this warning
wouldn't trigger, because the lock has been dropped before calling
_solicit() and reacquired later, so no mismatch on ->current could happen,
but now as long as the lock is held during _solicit() call, this would
trigger on the next unlock.

But I am not able to see anything like that in the code. Dave, do you have
any idea? (the thread started at http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/2/22/105).

--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-02-22 18:05    [W:0.066 / U:1.400 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site