Re: 3.4+ tty lockdep trace

[Ming Lei]

On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 4:07 PM, Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 4:32 AM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 03:54:57PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
>>> On Thu, 24 May 2012 13:24:56 +0200
>>> Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > And here is the second one attached as well, so these are two
>>> > different warnings I get with the new version.
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm somewhat baffled by this one. Can lockdep be fooled by an object
>>> being freed and reallocated at the same address, Is there any markup
>>> that should be present to avoid that ?
>>
>> Sasha,
>>
>> Did you apply Ming's second patch. His first patch (the one referenced
>> in the email) didn't have the unlock fixup.
>
> Nope, I just got the first one.
>
> What's the right patchset to use atm? I know about these patches from
> Ming, and I see Alan sent out two patches yesterday. Which ones should
> I use for testing?

You can try to apply my 2nd patch against Alan's two patches for the tests.


Thanks,
-- 
Ming Lei
--
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/