![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread Complete thread (EXPERIMENTAL) |
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. | ||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||
| Last update: 2008-03-27 11:05 [W:1.933 / U:0.000 seconds] ©2003-2005 Jasper Spaans | |||||||||||