Re: [PATCH 4/4] Staging: lustre: sparse lock warning fix

[Dilger, Andreas]

On 2015/05/18, 3:21 PM, "Dan Carpenter" <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 08:34:51PM +0200, Adrian Remonda wrote:
>> Fixed sparse warning: context imbalance in 'nrs_resource_put_safe' -
>> 'different lock contexts for basic block' by releasing the lock on each
>> iteration of the for loop.
>> 
>
>That changelog doesn't sound correct at all.  That's not a correct
>motivation or explanation.
>
>I reviewed the patch and it's likely going to cause dead locks. The code
>is trying to take the spinlock for the first pointer in the array and
>release it at the end.  Now it takes the first pointer's spinlock a
>bunch of times (dead lock) and releases it once (will not happen because
>we are already dead).

It isn't clear to me what the checkpatch complaint actually means?  Is it
that the spin_lock() and spin_unlock() calls have different amounts of
indentation?

Cheers, Andreas
-- 
Andreas Dilger

Lustre Software Architect
Intel High Performance Data Division


--
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/