[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130506085025.GB13861@dyad.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 6 May 2013 10:50:25 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Colin Cross <ccross@...roid.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@...omium.org>,
Paul Walmsley <paul@...an.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Ben Chan <benchan@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] freezer: add unsafe versions of freezable helpers
On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 02:04:09PM -0700, Colin Cross wrote:
> NFS calls the freezable helpers with locks held, which is unsafe
> and caused lockdep warnings when 6aa9707 "lockdep: check that no
> locks held at freeze time" was applied (reverted in dbf520a).
> Add new *_unsafe versions of the helpers that will not run the
> lockdep test when 6aa9707 is reapplied, and call them from NFS.
Am I the only one that would like a bit more information about why NFS does
this and why we need to work around it?
>From replies in this thread I surmise its got something to do with hard NFS
mounts. And I suppose I could go apply google to lkml and try and find the
previous discussion, but really this should be in the Changelog.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists