Re: [EXT4 set 5][PATCH 1/1] expand inode i_extra_isize to supportfeatures in larger inode

[Andrew Morton]

On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 21:21:03 +0200 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Shows the current stacktrace where we violate the previously established
> locking order.

yup, but the lock_page() which we did inside truncate_mutex was a 
lock_page() against a different address_space: the blockdev mapping.

So this is OK - we'll never take truncate_mutex against the blockdev
mapping (it doesn't have one, for a start ;))

This is similar to the quite common case where we take inode A's
i_mutex inside inode B's i_mutex, which needs special lockdep annotations.

I think.  I haven't looked into this in detail.
-
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/