Re: [PATCH][-mm] reclassify sg_sysfs_class for lockdep

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@...>
Cc: <akpm@...>, <greg@...>, <matthew@...>, <kay.sievers@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, <linux-scsi@...>
Date: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 - 10:40 am

On Tue, 2008-05-27 at 18:10 +0800, Dave Young wrote:

This isn't really a generic solution, is it?  It only works because we
currently only have two users of the interface functions, so if we
reclassify one they look separate to lockdep.  It will fall over again
if we ever get another one.

Surely the correct fix is to initialise lockdep for the mutex the same
way we did for the semaphore in class_register() (which does exactly the
same locking without triggering lockdep)?  That way we'll also fix the
problem for other conversions of semaphore->mutex.

James



--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH][-mm] reclassify sg_sysfs_class for lockdep, Dave Young, (Tue May 27, 6:10 am)
Re: [PATCH][-mm] reclassify sg_sysfs_class for lockdep, Matthew Wilcox, (Wed May 28, 10:49 am)
Re: [PATCH][-mm] reclassify sg_sysfs_class for lockdep, Andrew Morton, (Wed May 28, 3:18 pm)
Re: [PATCH][-mm] reclassify sg_sysfs_class for lockdep, James Bottomley, (Wed May 28, 10:40 am)
Re: [PATCH][-mm] reclassify sg_sysfs_class for lockdep, James Bottomley, (Wed May 28, 11:25 pm)