Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 10 Feb 2010 11:12:18 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] sysfs: differentiate between locking links and non-links | From | Américo Wang <> |
| |
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 10:19 AM, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> wrote: > Hello, > > On 02/10/2010 11:08 AM, Américo Wang wrote: >> This bug report is new for me. Recently we received lots of sysfs lockdep >> warnings, I am working on a patch to fix all the bogus ones. >> >> However, this one is _not_ similar to the other cases, as you decribed. >> This patch could fix the problem, but not a good fix, IMO. We need more >> work in sysfs layer to fix this kind of things. I will take care of this. > > Can't we just give each s_active lock a separate class? Would that be > too costly? >
Not because it is expensive or not, it is because whether it hits the real problem.
What I am doing is trying to add a "mutable" flag to sysfs files, those files could be removed from kernel during some changes, e.g. cpu hotplug, I/O scheduler switch. I add a new lockdep class for all of them, so that will be safe for all cases like this.
If I understand this case correctly, it is not that different with the rest cases that I met, thus should be included into my fix.
Thanks. -- 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/
| |