From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Thu, 26 Apr 2007 10:13:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [66.187.233.31]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id l3QHDqfB021432 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2007 10:13:53 -0700 Message-ID: <4630DDC2.2040705@sandeen.net> Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 12:13:38 -0500 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: 2.6.20.3 - possible recursive locking detected - in XFS References: <200704251116.57737.jesper.juhl@gmail.com> <20070425233345.GN48531920@melbourne.sgi.com> <9a8748490704260317u211c244au3c5478ac02c12c43@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <9a8748490704260317u211c244au3c5478ac02c12c43@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Jesper Juhl Cc: David Chinner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xfs-masters@oss.sgi.com, xfs@oss.sgi.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk Jesper Juhl wrote: > On 26/04/07, David Chinner wrote: >> Known false positive - XFS doesn't have the annotations needed for >> this yet; we've got a patch that will probably make it's way into 6.5.22 that >> should fix most of these issues. wow... 6.5.22.... do we really have to wait that long? :) -Eric