From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>, Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>,
"Myklebust, Trond" <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.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>, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: LOCKDEP: 3.9-rc1: mount.nfs/4272 still has locks held!
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 13:36:36 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130306213636.GP1227@htj.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFy49AWptMcvEzJxg95ikf-dC+-vcCPq-cnaCCwje3tyoQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 01:31:10PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> So I do agree that we probably have *too* many of the stupid "let's
> check if we can freeze", and I suspect that the NFS code should get
> rid of the "freezable_schedule()" that is causing this warning
> (because I also agree that you should *not* freeze while holding
> locks, because it really can cause deadlocks), but I do suspect that
> network filesystems do need to have a few places where they check for
> freezing on their own... Exactly because freezing isn't *quite* like a
> signal.
Well, I don't really know much about nfs so I can't really tell, but
for most other cases, dealing with freezing like a signal should work
fine from what I've seen although I can't be sure before actually
trying. Trond, Bruce, can you guys please chime in?
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-06 21:36 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 [this message]
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
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=20130306213636.GP1227@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 \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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).