Re: LOCKDEP warning due to ext_devt_lock

[NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 931 bytes --]

On Wed, 27 May 2015 21:32:21 -0600 Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com> wrote:

> On 05/27/2015 08:32 PM, NeilBrown wrote:
> >
> > Hi Keith,
> >   I'm getting lockdep warning around use of ext_devt_lock.
> >
> > [11428.266019] inconsistent {SOFTIRQ-ON-W} -> {IN-SOFTIRQ-W} usage.
> >
> >   As you say in
> >      2da78092dda1 ("block: Fix dev_t minor allocation lifetime")
> > ext_devt_lock can be taken from call_rcu's soft-irq.
> > I think that means it should always use the _irq verion of spinlock.
> 
> Wouldn't spin_lock_bh() and friends suffice then?
> 

Quite possibly.  I've never actually used those so I don't tend to think
about them.  But only reflection I think they would be exactly right.
I'll modify my patch for future testing.

BTW, did you get my:

   [PATCH v2] block: discard bdi_unregister() in favour of bdi_destroy()

??  I haven't seen it appear in your 'block' tree.

Thanks,
NeilBrown

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 811 bytes --]