Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*xfs_file_ioctl\s+\/\s+xfs_freeze\:\s+BUG\:\s+warning\s+at\s+kernel\/mutex\-debug\.c\:80\/debug_mutex_unlock\(\)\s*$/: 15 ]

Total 15 documents matching your query.

1. Re: xfs_file_ioctl / xfs_freeze: BUG: warning at kernel/mutex-debug.c:80/debug_mutex_unlock() (score: 1)

Author: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>

Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 08:37:34 +1100

Oh, that still hasn't been fixed? Generic bug, not XFS - the global mutexes complain loudly when a the process unlocking the mutex is not the process that locked it. Basically, the generic code is br

/archives/xfs/2007-01/msg00004.html (16,726 bytes)

2. Re: xfs_file_ioctl / xfs_freeze: BUG: warning at kernel/mutex-debug.c:80/debug_mutex_unlock() (score: 1)

Author: Sami Farin <safari-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 13:03:23 +0200

Looked like it =) Forgot to. Thanks for patch. It fixed the issue, no more warnings. BTW. the fix is not in 2.6.git, either. -- Do what you love because life is too short for anything else.

/archives/xfs/2007-01/msg00017.html (11,175 bytes)

3. Re: xfs_file_ioctl / xfs_freeze: BUG: warning at kernel/mutex-debug.c:80/debug_mutex_unlock() (score: 1)

Author:

Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 10:40:54 -0600

Hm, it was proposed upstream a while ago: http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/9/27/137 I guess it got lost? -Eric

/archives/xfs/2007-01/msg00028.html (11,494 bytes)

4. Re: xfs_file_ioctl / xfs_freeze: BUG: warning at kernel/mutex-debug.c:80/debug_mutex_unlock() (score: 1)

Author:

Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 15:56:36 -0800

Sad. The alternative would be to implement mutex_unlock_dont_warn_if_a_different_task_did_it(). Ingo? Possible?

/archives/xfs/2007-01/msg00034.html (13,427 bytes)

5. Re: xfs_file_ioctl / xfs_freeze: BUG: warning at kernel/mutex-debug.c:80/debug_mutex_unlock() (score: 1)

Author:

Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 07:41:13 +0100

i'd like to avoid it as much as i'd like to avoid having to add spin_unlock_dont_warn_if_a_different_task_did_it(). Unlocking by a different task is usually a sign of messy locking and bugs lurking.

/archives/xfs/2007-01/msg00045.html (11,147 bytes)

6. Re: xfs_file_ioctl / xfs_freeze: BUG: warning at kernel/mutex-debug.c:80/debug_mutex_unlock() (score: 1)

Author:

Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 08:37:34 +1100

Oh, that still hasn't been fixed? Generic bug, not XFS - the global mutexes complain loudly when a the process unlocking the mutex is not the process that locked it. Basically, the generic code is br

/archives/xfs/2007-01/msg00244.html (16,726 bytes)

7. Re: xfs_file_ioctl / xfs_freeze: BUG: warning at kernel/mutex-debug.c:80/debug_mutex_unlock() (score: 1)

Author:

Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 13:03:23 +0200

Looked like it =) Forgot to. Thanks for patch. It fixed the issue, no more warnings. BTW. the fix is not in 2.6.git, either. -- Do what you love because life is too short for anything else.

/archives/xfs/2007-01/msg00257.html (11,175 bytes)

8. Re: xfs_file_ioctl / xfs_freeze: BUG: warning at kernel/mutex-debug.c:80/debug_mutex_unlock() (score: 1)

Author: >

Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 10:40:54 -0600

Hm, it was proposed upstream a while ago: http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/9/27/137 I guess it got lost? -Eric

/archives/xfs/2007-01/msg00268.html (11,494 bytes)

9. Re: xfs_file_ioctl / xfs_freeze: BUG: warning at kernel/mutex-debug.c:80/debug_mutex_unlock() (score: 1)

Author: >

Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 15:56:36 -0800

Sad. The alternative would be to implement mutex_unlock_dont_warn_if_a_different_task_did_it(). Ingo? Possible?

/archives/xfs/2007-01/msg00274.html (13,427 bytes)

10. Re: xfs_file_ioctl / xfs_freeze: BUG: warning at kernel/mutex-debug.c:80/debug_mutex_unlock() (score: 1)

Author: >

Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 07:41:13 +0100

i'd like to avoid it as much as i'd like to avoid having to add spin_unlock_dont_warn_if_a_different_task_did_it(). Unlocking by a different task is usually a sign of messy locking and bugs lurking.

/archives/xfs/2007-01/msg00285.html (11,147 bytes)

11. Re: xfs_file_ioctl / xfs_freeze: BUG: warning at kernel/mutex-debug.c:80/debug_mutex_unlock() (score: 1)

Author: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>

Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 08:37:34 +1100

Oh, that still hasn't been fixed? Generic bug, not XFS - the global mutexes complain loudly when a the process unlocking the mutex is not the process that locked it. Basically, the generic code is br

/archives/xfs/2007-01/msg00484.html (16,842 bytes)

12. Re: xfs_file_ioctl / xfs_freeze: BUG: warning at kernel/mutex-debug.c:80/debug_mutex_unlock() (score: 1)

Author: Sami Farin <safari-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 13:03:23 +0200

Looked like it =) Forgot to. Thanks for patch. It fixed the issue, no more warnings. BTW. the fix is not in 2.6.git, either. -- Do what you love because life is too short for anything else.

/archives/xfs/2007-01/msg00497.html (11,299 bytes)

13. Re: xfs_file_ioctl / xfs_freeze: BUG: warning at kernel/mutex-debug.c:80/debug_mutex_unlock() (score: 1)

Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>

Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 10:40:54 -0600

Hm, it was proposed upstream a while ago: http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/9/27/137 I guess it got lost? -Eric

/archives/xfs/2007-01/msg00508.html (11,658 bytes)

14. Re: xfs_file_ioctl / xfs_freeze: BUG: warning at kernel/mutex-debug.c:80/debug_mutex_unlock() (score: 1)

Author: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx>

Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 15:56:36 -0800

Sad. The alternative would be to implement mutex_unlock_dont_warn_if_a_different_task_did_it(). Ingo? Possible?

/archives/xfs/2007-01/msg00514.html (13,551 bytes)

15. Re: xfs_file_ioctl / xfs_freeze: BUG: warning at kernel/mutex-debug.c:80/debug_mutex_unlock() (score: 1)

Author: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>

Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 07:41:13 +0100

i'd like to avoid it as much as i'd like to avoid having to add spin_unlock_dont_warn_if_a_different_task_did_it(). Unlocking by a different task is usually a sign of messy locking and bugs lurking.

/archives/xfs/2007-01/msg00525.html (11,310 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 15
Page: [1]