[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1227325268.10134.2.camel@localhost>
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2008 14:41:08 +1100
From: Michael Ellerman <michael@...erman.id.au>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc: Joachim Fenkes <fenkes@...ibm.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
OF-EWG <ewg@...ts.openfabrics.org>,
LinuxPPC-Dev <linuxppc-dev@...abs.org>,
Christoph Raisch <raisch@...ibm.com>,
OF-General <general@...ts.openfabrics.org>,
Stefan Roscher <stefan.roscher@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] IB/ehca: Fix lockdep failures for shca_list_lock
On Fri, 2008-11-21 at 17:02 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-11-21 at 16:37 +0100, Joachim Fenkes wrote:
>
> > + u64 flags;
>
> > - spin_lock(&shca_list_lock);
> > + spin_lock_irqsave(&shca_list_lock, flags);
>
> That's wrong and I think will give a warning on all machines where
> u64 != unsigned long. Might not particularly matter in this case.
Crud, sorry.
> Also, generally it seems wrong to say "fix lockdep failure" when the
> patch really fixes a bug that lockdep happened to find.
True. I guess it should be "fix locking error found with lockdep", to
make it clear no one has actually hit the bug.
cheers
--
Michael Ellerman
OzLabs, IBM Australia Development Lab
wwweb: http://michael.ellerman.id.au
phone: +61 2 6212 1183 (tie line 70 21183)
We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors,
we borrow it from our children. - S.M.A.R.T Person
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (198 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists