lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Feb]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [lock validator] inet6_destroy_sock(): soft-safe -> soft-unsafe lock dependency
From
On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 12:27:31PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> i think this might be a false positive, caused by my (ill-advised)
> change below? [i did the change to clean up an unlock ordering
> assymetry, but apparently i thus also introduced the xmit_lock ->
> queue_lock dependency.]

As far as I can see your change can't cause the previous report,
unless the validator is treating the trylock in the same way as
a normal lock operation.

Cheers,
--
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
-
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: 2006-02-02 13:21    [W:0.149 / U:21.216 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site