![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 02:18:12AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
...
> Anyway, the accusation is that lockdep is busted, in that it doesn't realise that
> local_irq_disable() blocks softirqs.
Usually lockdep gets this right, so I've some doubts too. But here
it's not only about softirqs; this:
> >> Mar 25 19:48:46 better kernel: #1: (target_list_lock){--..}, at: [<c0399c0d>]
means lockdep saw hardirqs enabled while acquiring/holding this lock.
Jarek P.
--
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: 2008-03-27 10:05 [W:0.306 / U:0.230 seconds] ©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans | ||||||||||