Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 22 Mar 2007 10:06:32 +0100 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] lockdep: lockdep_depth vs. debug_locks Re: [2.6.20] BUG: workqueue leaked lock |
| |
* Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 07:11 +0100, Jarek Poplawski wrote: > > Here is some joke: > > > > [PATCH] lockdep: lockdep_depth vs. debug_locks > > > > lockdep really shouldn't be used when debug_locks == 0! > > This happens then lockdep reports a fatal error, at which point > it will stop tracking locks and leave whatever state was there. > > > Reported-by: Folkert van Heusden <folkert@vanheusden.com> > > Inspired-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru> > > Signed-off-by: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@o2.pl> > > This looks sane, thanks for figuring this out. > > Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Ingo - 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/
| |