lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Aug]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/2] workqueue lockdep limitations/bugs
    From
    Date
    Hi Tejun,

    > > Let's say we again have an ordered workqueue, and the following:
    > >
    > > work1_function
    > > {
    > > mutex_lock(&mutex);
    > > }
    >
    > Regular mutexes complain when the locker isn't the unlocker already.
    > Do we really care about this case?

    Oh, sorry for the confusion. I was just eliding the - not very
    interesting for this case - unlock. Really I should've typed up a
    lock/unlock pair in all of the examples.

    johannes

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2018-08-21 19:17    [W:3.103 / U:0.012 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site