Re: [RFC/PATCH] debug workqueue deadlocks with lockdep

From: Johannes Berg
Date: Wed Jul 04 2007 - 09:59:30 EST


On Wed, 2007-07-04 at 14:21 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:

> well, in this case the lock/unlock should nest perfectly (i.e. it should
> always be balanced perfectly), so indeed calling with nested==1 leads to
> stricter checking.
>
> non-nested unlocks occur when people do stuff like:
>
> spin_lock(&lock1);
> spin_lock(&lock2);
> spin_unlock(&lock1);
> spin_unlock(&lock2);
>
> the first unlock is not 'nested perfectly'. Now for the workqueue
> dep_map this shouldnt be a legal combination, right?

I don't think so, will change to use nested==1.

johannes

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part