Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 20 May 2008 19:08:54 +0200 | From | Louis Rilling <> | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] configfs: Make nested default groups lockdep-friendly |
| |
Arjan van de Ven a écrit : > On Tue, 20 May 2008 18:33:20 +0200 > Louis Rilling <Louis.Rilling@kerlabs.com> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> The following patches fix lockdep warnings resulting from (correct) >> recursive locking in configfs. >> >> Current lockdep annotations for inode mutexes in configfs are >> lockdep-friendly provided that: >> 1/ config_groups have at most one level of default groups (see >> configfs_attach_group()), >> 2/ config_groups having default groups are never removed (see >> configfs_detach_prep()). >> >> Since lockdep does not handle such correct recursion, the idea is to >> insert lockdep_off()/lockdep_on() for inode mutexes as soon as the >> level of recursion of the I_MUTEX_PARENT -> I_MUTEX_CHILD dependency >> pattern increases. > > I'm... not entirely happy with such a solution ;( > > there must be a better one.
Hmm, to me there are three solutions:
1/ keep lockdep and configfs like they are, and use this patchset
2/ enhance lockdep to handle wariable-depth but correct recursion: seems uncertain...
3/ remove this recursive locking from configfs: unfortunately, it seems that there are a good reasons for doing recursive inode locking, at least when removing a config_group with default groups. So, seems uncertain too...
Other ideas?
-- Dr Louis Rilling Kerlabs Skype: louis.rilling Batiment Germanium Phone: (+33|0) 6 80 89 08 23 80 avenue des Buttes de Coesmes http://www.kerlabs.com/ 35700 Rennes -- 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/
| |