lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Nov]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 2.6.24-rc2-mm1: kcryptd vs lockdep
Torsten Kaiser wrote:
> On Nov 19, 2007 8:56 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
>> * Torsten Kaiser <just.for.lkml@googlemail.com> wrote:
...
> Above this acquire/release sequence is the following comment:
> #ifdef CONFIG_LOCKDEP
> /*
> * It is permissible to free the struct work_struct
> * from inside the function that is called from it,
> * this we need to take into account for lockdep too.
> * To avoid bogus "held lock freed" warnings as well
> * as problems when looking into work->lockdep_map,
> * make a copy and use that here.
> */
> struct lockdep_map lockdep_map = work->lockdep_map;
> #endif
>
> Did something trigger this anyway?
>
> Anything I could try, apart from more boots with slub_debug=F?

Please could you try which patch from the dm-crypt series cause this ?
(agk-dm-dm-crypt* names.)

I suspect agk-dm-dm-crypt-move-bio-submission-to-thread.patch because
there is one work struct used subsequently in two threads...
(io thread already started while crypt thread is processing lockdep_map
after calling f(work)...)

(btw these patches prepare dm-crypt for next patchset introducing
async cryptoapi, so there should be no functional changes yet.)

Milan
--
mbroz@redhat.com


-
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: 2007-11-19 22:05    [W:0.092 / U:0.700 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site