[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1297850294.2413.30.camel@twins>
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 10:58:14 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
"Xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com" <Xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>,
Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...ell.com>,
Larry Woodman <lwoodman@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>, Johannes Weiner <jweiner@...hat.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix pgd_lock deadlock
On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 00:17 +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 12:03:30AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > I assume you run it with a lockdep enabled kernel as well, right ?
>
> Yes, I always run with lockdep and prove locking enabled on my test
> box, not sure how it's meant to trigger more bugs in this case, the
> debug check that should be relevant for this is DEBUG_VM and that is
> enabled too of course. I didn't try DEBUG_PAGEALLOC yet.
I think what Thomas tried to tell you is that your
VM_BUG_ON(in_interrupt()) is fully redundant if you have lockdep
enabled.
Lockdep will warn you if a !irqsave lock is taken from IRQ context,
since that is a clear inversion problem.
--
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