Re: [Patch 0/2] sysfs: fix s_active lockdep warning

[Cong Wang]

Dave Young wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Cong Wang <amwang@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Dave Young wrote:
> > > On Fri, Feb 05, 2010 at 04:41:57PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 2010-02-05 at 10:30 -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, 5 Feb 2010, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Right, so this device stuff is much more complicated than I was led to
> > > > > > believe ;-)
> > > > > Haven't I told you all along that tree-structured locking is
> > > > > complicated?  :-)
> > > > Well, regular tree's aren't all that complicated, but multiple
> > > > inter-locking trees is a whole different story indeed.
> > > I ever tried converting device semaphore to mutex, but failed with same
> > > issue.
> > >
> > > At least now there's no lockdep solution for it, so I recommend revert
> > > the mutex converting patch.
> > >
> > > following lockdep warning with rc6-mm1:
> > >
> > > [    0.397123] [    0.397124]
> > > =============================================
> > > [    0.397359] [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
> > > [    0.397480] 2.6.33-rc6-mm1 #1
> > > [    0.397596] ---------------------------------------------
> > > [    0.397717] swapper/1 is trying to acquire lock:
> > > [    0.397836]  (&dev->mutex){+.+...}, at: [<c12662e4>]
> > > __driver_attach+0x38/0x63
> > > [    0.398162] [    0.398162] but task is already holding lock:
> > > [    0.398393]  (&dev->mutex){+.+...}, at: [<c12662d8>]
> > > __driver_attach+0x2c/0x63
> > > [    0.399999]
> > Alan already provided a patch for this issue earlier in this thread.
>
> Yes, but device locks can not be classified with regular tree style.

True, Alan mentioned the device trees could be more than one,
which is the difference with the sysfs, I think, where we only
have one tree.

> Please read the whole thread.

Surely I did.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/