[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?)
Barry K. Nathan wrote:

> On 6/4/06, Ingo Molnar <> wrote:
>> nevertheless i'll turn that warning into a less scary message.
> This discussion seems to imply that I reported a false positive... is
> it *known* that I reported a false positive, or is it only a strong
> possibility?
> Assuming it's a false positive: Since this stops the tracer, it means
> that if an actual deadlock possibility is detected later [I'm assuming
> that detection of those doesn't get shut down by the bad-lock-ordering
> detection either], useful information could be missing from
> /proc/latency_trace, if I am not mistaken. Perhaps this could impede
> lockdep testing for people running reiser4 filesystems. I guess this
> is just a theoretical possibility at this point, but perhaps it's
> worth mentioning.

Monday Russian time Zam will be in, he is the locking guy for reiser4.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2006-06-05 04:50    [W:0.060 / U:0.744 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site