lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jan]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 2.6.33-rc3 -- INFO: possible recursive locking -- (s_active){++++.+}, at: [<c10d2941>] sysfs_hash_and_remove+0x3d/0x4f
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 04:32:31PM -0800, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> writes:
>
> > On 01/11/2010 11:26 AM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >> From: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
> >> Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 18:13:35 -0800
> >> Subject: [PATCH] sysfs: Add support for lockdep subclasses to s_active
> >>
> >> We have apparently valid cases where the code for a sysfs attribute
> >> removes other sysfs attributes. Without support for subclasses
> >> lockdep flags a possible recursive lock problem as it figures
> >> the first sysfs attribute could be attempting to remove itself.
> >>
> >> By adding support for sysfs subclasses we can teach lockdep to
> >> distinguish between different types of sysfs attributes and not
> >> get confused.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
> >
> > Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
>
> Now if I can just get a Tested-by this patch will be all set ;)

Hi Eric,

Is this the same locking problem that this patch fixes?

http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/1/11/26

Cheers,

Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-01-12 04:05    [W:0.051 / U:0.572 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site