lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Apr]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Weird rcu lockdep warning
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 09:24:26PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 09:00:57AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 05:51:11PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>
> [ . . .]
>
> > > Note I just tested the patch the previous one and it looks fine now.
> > > You can then safely consider the "general idea" fixes the problem :)
> >
> > Thank you, Frederic!!!
>
> And here is what I hope is the official fix.
>
> Could you please test it?
>
> Thanx, Paul
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> commit 9be39c445a41e458d53cf9a57d25dbfa4b74c970
> Author: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Date: Tue Apr 13 18:45:51 2010 -0700
>
> rcu: Make RCU lockdep check the lockdep_recursion variable
>
> The lockdep facility temporarily disables lockdep checking by incrementing
> the current->lockdep_recursion variable. Such disabling happens in NMIs
> and in other situations where lockdep might expect to recurse on itself.
> This patch therefore checks current->lockdep_recursion, disabling RCU
> lockdep splats when this variable is non-zero. In addition, this patch
> removes the "likely()", as suggested by Lai Jiangshan.
>
> Reported-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
> Reported-by: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>


Tested-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>

Thanks!



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-04-15 20:59    [W:0.050 / U:0.276 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site