[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1201689272.28547.204.camel@lappy>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:34:32 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: hrtimers and lockdep (was: Re: 2.6.24-rc6: possible recursive
locking detected)
( trimmed CC list )
Sorry for the delay, this message seems to have gotten lost in my
inbox :-/
On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 00:27 +0300, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 01/13, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Offtopic question. Why do we have so many lockdep stuff in timer.c and hrtimer.c ?
> We never lock 2 bases at the same time, except in migrate_timers(). We can kill
> double_spin_lock() and base_lock_keys[] and just use spin_lock_nested in
> migrate_timers(), no?
Lets ask Thomas.. :-)
--
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