| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <a781481a0706250854p4dad0cb6k20111db0f1c13e55@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 21:24:11 +0530 From: "Satyam Sharma" <satyam.sharma@...il.com> To: "Johannes Weiner" <hannes-kernel@...urebad.de> Cc: "Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, xfs-masters@....sgi.com, "David Chinner" <dgc@....com>, "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu> Subject: Re: [BUG] Lockdep warning with XFS on 2.6.22-rc6 On 6/25/07, Johannes Weiner <hannes-kernel@...urebad.de> wrote: > [...] > this is what just hit the ring buffer when I was surfing with elinks on a > brand-new -rc6. Johannes: This is a known bogus warning. You can safely ignore it. David, Ingo: [ Ok, so we know that XFS wants to lock inodes in ascending inode number order and not strictly the parent-first-child-second order that rest of the fs/ code does, so that makes it difficult to teach lockdep about this kind of lock ordering ... ] However, this (bogus) warning still causes way too much noise on the lists (2-3 or more every week?) and most users wouldn't understand how or why this warning is bogus, so would get unnecessarily disturbed about it. Could there be a way to whitelist such "known bogus cases" in lockdep and stop it from complaining? Satyam - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists