Re: [PATCH v3] lockdep: check that no locks held at freeze time
From: Rafael J. Wysocki
Date: Wed Feb 20 2013 - 07:49:18 EST
On Wednesday, February 20, 2013 11:37:19 AM Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > We shouldn't try_to_freeze if locks are held. Verified that
> > I get no lockdep warnings after applying this patch and
> > "vfork: don't freezer_count() for in-kernel users of CLONE_VFORK".
> > Changes since v1:
> > * LKML: <20130215111635.GA26955@xxxxxxxxx> Ingo Molnar
> > * Added a msg string that gets passed in.
> > * LKML: <20130215154449.GD30829@xxxxxxxxxx> Oleg Nesterov
> > * Check PF_NOFREEZE in try_to_freeze().
> > Changes since v2:
> > * LKML: <20130216170605.GC4910@xxxxxxxxxx> Oleg Nesterov
> > * Avoid unnecessary PF_NOFREEZE check when !CONFIG_LOCKDEP.
> > * Mandeep Singh Baines
> > * Generalize an exit specific printk.
> > Signed-off-by: Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > CC: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > CC: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > CC: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx>
> > CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Looks good to me now.
> Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Which tree should this go through?
Well, I can take it if that's OK.
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
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/