| To: | Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [LOCKDEP] xfs: possible recursive locking detected |
| From: | Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 4 Jul 2006 15:03:38 +0200 |
| Cc: | Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@xxxxxxxxx>, Matthew Wilcox <matthew@xxxxxx>, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <20060704095743.GA21480@xxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20060704004116.GA7612@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20060704011858.GG1605@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20060704112503.H1495869@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20060704063225.GA2752@xxxxxxx> <20060704084143.GA12931@xxxxxxx> <20060704191100.C1497438@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20060704095743.GA21480@xxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.4.2.1i |
another thing: i have added real 'lock allocation debugging'
(CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC) to the kernel, which covers spinlocks,
rwlocks, mutexes and rw-semaphores. It does the following:
This feature will check whether any held lock (spinlock, rwlock,
mutex or rwsem) is incorrectly freed by the kernel, via any of the
memory-freeing routines (kfree(), kmem_cache_free(), free_pages(),
vfree(), etc.), whether a live lock is incorrectly reinitialized via
spin_lock_init()/mutex_init()/etc., or whether there is any lock
held during task exit.
so i suspect:
fs/xfs/xfs_mount.h:#define AIL_LOCK_DESTROY(x) spinlock_destroy(x)
fs/xfs/linux-2.6/spin.h:#define spinlock_destroy(lock)
needs to change and we need to implement spinlock_destroy(), a'ka
mutex_destroy()? [which i added recently too]
Ingo
|
| Previous by Date: | BUG with inode allocating, Nickolay |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: determining sunit, pgs |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [LOCKDEP] xfs: possible recursive locking detected, Ingo Molnar |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [LOCKDEP] xfs: possible recursive locking detected, Nathan Scott |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |