[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20100126144641.5AB3.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 14:49:12 +0900 (JST)
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
Tavis Ormandy <taviso@...gle.com>,
Jeff Dike <jdike@...toit.com>, Julien Tinnes <jln@...gle.com>,
Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com,
Americo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [2.6.33-rc5] starting emacs makes lockdep warning
> > On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 11:20 AM, KOSAKI Motohiro
> > <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > Current linus tree made following lockdep warning when starting emacs command.
> > > Is this known issue?
> > >
> > >
> > > =========================================================
> > > [ INFO: possible irq lock inversion dependency detected ]
> > > 2.6.33-rc5 #77
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------
> > > emacs/1609 just changed the state of lock:
> > > (&(&tty->ctrl_lock)->rlock){+.....}, at: [<ffffffff8127c648>] tty_fasync+0xe8/0x190
> > > but this lock took another, HARDIRQ-unsafe lock in the past:
> > > (&(&sighand->siglock)->rlock){-.....}
> > >
> > > and interrupts could create inverse lock ordering between them.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Hey,
> >
> > does reverting commit 703625118 help?
>
> Seems solved.
>
> Thanks.
I'm sorry.
I forgot to cc related person at last mail.
Greg, can you please consider revert commit 703625118?
--
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