From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hugh Dickins Subject: Re: [Bug #15202] lockdep warning during elevator_switch Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 03:24:46 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; t=1269228302; bh=43qDYFLWIXfoGo9M8BaMEkD6ngg=; h=Sender:Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=Hw//ZzXVmN5C71nFCyjaMSLvrWlV6SDjcbWVpn6ylHbBiyB7j/QIDP4zlTxwb212s g7nn8ZADfPr4ZYvu+TyHw== In-Reply-To: Sender: kernel-testers-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , Kernel Testers List , Maciej Rutecki On Sun, 21 Mar 2010, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions > introduced between 2.6.32 and 2.6.33. Please verify if it still should > be listed and let the tracking team know (either way). > > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15202 > Subject : lockdep warning during elevator_switch > Submitter : Hugh Dickins > Date : 2010-01-31 23:55 (50 days old) > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126498212613051&w=4 Yes, it is still a regression 2.6.33.1 (though fixed in 2.6.34-rc1: my guess is that it will be left as a regression in 2.6.33-stable, since it only happens when you have chosen CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING=y). Hugh