[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110120160849.GA6609@dhcp231-156.rdu.redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:08:49 -0500
From: Josef Bacik <josef@...hat.com>
To: Daniel J Blueman <daniel.blueman@...il.com>
Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux BTRFS <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
Josef Bacik <josef@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [2.6.38-rc1] btrfs potential false-positive lockdep report...
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 10:53:51AM +0700, Daniel J Blueman wrote:
> I saw a lockdep report with an instrumented 2.6.38-rc1 kernel [1].
>
> Checking the code, it looks more likely a false-positive due to the
> lock manipulation to satisfy lockdep, since CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC is
> defined.
>
> Is this the case?
>
Yeah these pop up every once and a while, its safe to just ignore it. Thanks,
Josef
--
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