xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [LOCKDEP] xfs: possible recursive locking detected

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


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>