Re: inconsistent lock state on 2.6.30?

xfs

Re: inconsistent lock state on 2.6.30?

To:	Sage Weil <sage@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:	Re: inconsistent lock state on 2.6.30?
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Fri, 10 Jul 2009 12:02:25 -0400
Cc:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to:	<20090626173558.GA402@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References:	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0906230925420.20462@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20090623170844.GA23971@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0906241438100.24641@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20090626173558.GA402@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent:	Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)

FYI all these warnings are due to the new in reclaim state tracking
that was added to lockdep recently.  I now have a tree fixing all these
warnings including those two you see.  It's all still a bit hacky, but
I'll soon post a patch series to fix them all in one way or another.

[More with this subject...]

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: inconsistent lock state on 2.6.30?, Christoph Hellwig <=

Previous by Date:	Re: kernel BUG with xfs_quota, Eric Sandeen
Next by Date:	Re: xfs_repair stops on "traversing filesystem...", Eric Sandeen
Previous by Thread:	Claims, Marcelino MCT
Next by Thread:	[PATCH, RFC] xfs_repair - clear inodes in incorrect btree format, Eric Sandeen
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]