xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: xfs vs. lockdep

To: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: xfs vs. lockdep
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2006 21:25:43 -0500
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20061010004726.GO11034@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <452A8DE2.4000608@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20061010004726.GO11034@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (Macintosh/20060909)
David Chinner wrote:

FWIW, we call mrfree() on both the ilock and the iolock, but these are
#defined to null statements. If there is a destructor for the underlying
lock type, we probably should call that in mrfree() so the debugging code
can catch these probelms that only trigger in debug code.

From a quick look I don't see those destructors, might be good to write some though.

It'd also be good to turn our spinlock_destroy(lock) into a WARN_ON(spin_is_locked(lock)) or something...

it'd be extra nice if lockdep could grok that the lock it's looking at is full of free poison, print a warning, take it off the list and move on... this was a bear to figure out which one was causing the problem.

I have a few changes to get more desructors called for some of the newer locks that are missing them (think agirotor_lock...) that I'll send when I get a moment.

-Eric

Cheers,

Dave.


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