lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Oct]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateWed, 18 Oct 2006 23:02:43 -0700
FromAndrew Morton <>
SubjectRe: INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected
On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 00:32:44 +1000
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

> alpha @ steudten Engineering wrote:
> > =======================================================
> > [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> > 2.6.18-1.2189self #1
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > kswapd0/186 is trying to acquire lock:
> > (&inode->i_mutex){--..}, at: [<c0326e32>] mutex_lock+0x21/0x24
> >
> > but task is already holding lock:
> > (iprune_mutex){--..}, at: [<c0326e32>] mutex_lock+0x21/0x24
> >
> > which lock already depends on the new lock.
>
> Thanks. __grab_cache_page wants to clear __GFP_FS, because it is
> holding the i_mutex so we don't want to reenter the filesystem in
> page reclaim.

We want to be able to enter page reclaim while holding i_mutex. Think what
the effect of not doing this would be upon write() (!)

This warning is more fallout from ntfs's insistence on taking i_mutex in
its clear_inode(). See lengthy and unproductive discussion at
http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/7/26/185 .

-
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: 2006-10-19 08:05    [from the cache]
©2003-2009