Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [LOCKDEP BUG][2.6.36-rc1] xt_info_wrlock? | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Date | Mon, 16 Aug 2010 21:16:17 +0200 |
| |
On Mon, 2010-08-16 at 20:48 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote: > Le lundi 16 août 2010 à 20:36 +0200, Peter Zijlstra a écrit : > > On Mon, 2010-08-16 at 14:16 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > @@ -729,8 +729,10 @@ static void get_counters(const struct > > > xt_table_info *t, > > > local_bh_enable(); > > > /* Processing counters from other cpus, we can let bottom half > > > enabled, > > > * (preemption is disabled) > > > + * We must turn off lockdep to avoid a false positive. > > > */ > > > > > > + lockdep_off(); > > > for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) { > > > > > nack! > > > Interesting. > > Care to elaborate ?
Adding lockdep_off() is just plain wrong, if you cannot describe the locking there's a fair chance its wrong anyway.
As it stands there's only a single lockdep_off(), and that lives in NTFS it looks like it could be annotated differently, but then, who cares about NTFS anyway ;-)
-- 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/
| |