lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Aug]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/2] workqueue lockdep limitations/bugs
From
Date
Hi Tejun,

> > Let's say we again have an ordered workqueue, and the following:
> >
> > work1_function
> > {
> > mutex_lock(&mutex);
> > }
>
> Regular mutexes complain when the locker isn't the unlocker already.
> Do we really care about this case?

Oh, sorry for the confusion. I was just eliding the - not very
interesting for this case - unlock. Really I should've typed up a
lock/unlock pair in all of the examples.

johannes

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-08-21 19:17    [W:0.072 / U:0.036 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site