[lkml]   [2006]   [Jun]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: 2.6.17-rc5-mm3: bad unlock ordering (reiser4?)
On Sun, 04 Jun 2006 13:33:26 PDT, Andrew Morton said:

> Why does the locking validator complain about unlocking ordering?

Presumably, if the lock nesting *should* be "take A, take B, release B,
release A", if it sees "Take A, Take B, release A" it means there's
potentially a missing 'release B' that got forgotten (most likely an
error case that does a 'return;' instead of a 'goto end_of_function_cleanup'
like we usually code.

Having said that, I'm not sure it qualifies as a "BUG". Certainly would
qualify for a "SMELLS_FISHY" though. But we don't have one of those handy,
so maybe BUG is as good as it gets (given that the person who built the
kernel *asked* to be nagged about locking funkyness)....
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-06-04 23:00    [W:0.059 / U:42.568 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site