From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: "Myklebust, Trond" <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>
Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@chromium.org>,
Ming Lei <ming.lei@canonical.com>,
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: LOCKDEP: 3.9-rc1: mount.nfs/4272 still has locks held!
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2013 17:14:23 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130306011423.GF1227@htj.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4FA345DA4F4AE44899BD2B03EEEC2FA9286B1246@sacexcmbx05-prd.hq.netapp.com>
Hello, Trond.
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 01:10:07AM +0000, Myklebust, Trond wrote:
> Not all RPC calls can just be interrupted and restarted. Something like
> an exclusive file create, unlink, file locking attempt, etc may give
> rise to different results when replayed in the above scenario.
> Interrupting an RPC call is not equivalent to cancelling its effects...
Then, the operation simply isn't freezable while in progress and
should be on the receiving end of failed-to-freeze error message and
users who depend on suspend/hibernation working properly should be
advised away from using nfs.
It doesn't really changes anything. The current code is buggy. We're
just not enforcing the rules strictly and people aren't hitting the
bug often enough.
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-06 1:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 61+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-04 13:57 LOCKDEP: 3.9-rc1: mount.nfs/4272 still has locks held! Ming Lei
2013-03-04 14:14 ` Myklebust, Trond
2013-03-04 14:23 ` Jeff Layton
2013-03-04 19:55 ` Mandeep Singh Baines
2013-03-04 20:53 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-03-04 22:08 ` Myklebust, Trond
2013-03-05 13:23 ` Jeff Layton
2013-03-05 17:46 ` Tejun Heo
2013-03-05 17:49 ` Tejun Heo
2013-03-05 19:03 ` Jeff Layton
2013-03-05 19:09 ` Tejun Heo
2013-03-05 23:39 ` Jeff Layton
2013-03-05 23:47 ` Tejun Heo
2013-03-06 18:16 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-03-06 18:53 ` Tejun Heo
2013-03-06 21:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-03-06 21:24 ` Tejun Heo
2013-03-06 21:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-03-06 21:36 ` Tejun Heo
2013-03-06 21:40 ` Tejun Heo
2013-03-13 15:17 ` Jeff Layton
2013-03-31 0:07 ` Paul Walmsley
2013-03-07 11:41 ` Jeff Layton
2013-03-07 15:25 ` Tejun Heo
2013-03-07 15:55 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-03-07 15:59 ` Myklebust, Trond
2013-03-07 16:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-03-07 16:45 ` Myklebust, Trond
2013-03-07 17:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-03-07 17:16 ` Myklebust, Trond
2013-03-07 21:43 ` Jeff Layton
2013-03-08 14:01 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-03-07 20:55 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-03-07 16:00 ` Tejun Heo
2013-03-06 18:17 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-03-06 18:40 ` Jeff Layton
2013-03-06 18:45 ` Tejun Heo
2013-03-06 1:10 ` Myklebust, Trond
2013-03-06 1:14 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2013-03-06 1:28 ` Tejun Heo
2013-03-06 12:00 ` Jeff Layton
2013-03-05 23:11 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-03-06 0:02 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-03-06 0:30 ` [PATCH] lockdep: make lock held while freezing check optional Mandeep Singh Baines
2013-03-07 12:03 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2013-03-06 0:59 ` LOCKDEP: 3.9-rc1: mount.nfs/4272 still has locks held! Mandeep Singh Baines
2013-03-06 1:05 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-03-06 1:16 ` Tejun Heo
2013-03-06 3:11 ` Mandeep Singh Baines
2013-03-06 9:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-03-06 12:06 ` Jeff Layton
2013-03-06 15:59 ` Mandeep Singh Baines
2013-03-06 18:23 ` Jeff Layton
2013-03-06 18:37 ` Myklebust, Trond
2013-03-06 20:15 ` Mandeep Singh Baines
2013-03-04 14:40 ` Ming Lei
2013-03-04 15:04 ` Jeff Layton
2013-03-04 15:33 ` Ming Lei
2013-03-04 15:53 ` Myklebust, Trond
2013-03-04 20:09 ` Mandeep Singh Baines
2013-03-04 20:10 ` Mandeep Singh Baines
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130306011423.GF1227@htj.dyndns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=jlayton@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@canonical.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=msb@chromium.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).