Re: [PATCH] sysfs: use different lockdep subclass for s_active deactivation

[Miles Lane]

On 4/26/07, Tejun Heo <htejun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> A sysfs node can delete other sysfs files when accessed.  This results
> in recursive s_active locking - read lock for file access, down lock
> of the vicitim for deactivation.  Tell lockdep that it's okay.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <htejun@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> Miles, please test this patch.  It should remove the lockdep warning.
> Fixes for the other two problems will soon follow.
>
> Greg, Andrew, after all the fixes are verified, I'll merge the fixes
> into the original patches and resend all the sysfs updates in better
> shape.  Sorry about all the trouble.

Should I test this with 2.6.21-rc7-mm2?
It doesn't apply cleanly.

# patch -p1 -l --dry-run < tejun.patch
patching file fs/sysfs/dir.c
Hunk #1 succeeded at 31 with fuzz 1 (offset -29 lines).
patching file fs/sysfs/sysfs.h
Hunk #1 succeeded at 40 (offset -1 lines).
Hunk #2 succeeded at 182 with fuzz 1 (offset -1 lines).
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/