lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Oct]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 000 of 4] Introduction
On Wednesday October 11, mingo@elte.hu wrote:
> >
> > I say "normally" because if a loop were created in the array->member
> > hierarchy a deadlock could happen. However that causes bigger
> > problems than a deadlock and should be fixed independently.
>
> ok to me. Sidenote: shouldnt we algorithmically forbid that "loop"
> scenario from occuring, as that possibility is what causes lockdep to
> complain about the worst-case scenario?

Yes we should. Possibly we could use the linkage information set up
by bd_claim_by_kobject. However I'm afraid that the locking required
to check that linkage safely will look very dead-lock prone to
lockdep. I suspect that can be worked-around though.

NeilBrown
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-10-11 11:23    [W:0.050 / U:0.648 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site