From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id o06HZdtR098993 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 11:35:39 -0600 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 8D8BE146C2F for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 09:36:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [18.85.46.34]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id LOCfJSbhC8hAOG1i for ; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 09:36:31 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:36:29 -0500 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: lockdep: inconsistent lock state Message-ID: <20100106173628.GA14148@infradead.org> References: <20091227212700.GA7613@discord.disaster> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20091227212700.GA7613@discord.disaster> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Dave Chinner Cc: LKML , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 08:27:00AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > This is the usual false positive that is detected - XFS takes locks in > reclaim that it also takes in non-reclaim paths. The reclaim path > from kswapd inverts lock ordering and so we get this report. This > case has never been a deadlock case because an inode in reclaim > cannot be referenced by any other path, so once again it is a > false positive.... This should be gone in 2.6.33-rc as we now tell lockdep about resetting the dependency graph for the iolock once entering the inode reclaim path. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs