Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 12 Jan 2010 14:01:34 +1100 | From | Dave Chinner <> | Subject | Re: 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
| |