Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 27 Mar 2009 14:05:02 -0500 | From | Larry Finger <> | Subject | Re: Possible IRQ lock inversion from 2.6.29-Linus-03321-gbe0ea69 (2.6.29-git) |
| |
Jonathan Corbet wrote: > > We could do that. When I made the change I'd verified that there were > no users in IRQ context, and I couldn't really see why there should > be. I'd rather avoid adding all those IRQ disables if I can avoid it. > > How about, instead, just reversing the order of lock acquisition in > fasync_helper()? That would increase the hold time for f_lock, but I > have a hard time seeing that being a real problem. I'm running with > the following now; all seems well. I'll send it up in a bit if nobody > gripes.
The patch gets rid of the warning for me.
Larry
| |