Re: [PATCH] slub: fix false-positive lockdep warning infree_partial()

[Christoph Lameter]

On Tue, 4 Feb 2014, Vladimir Davydov wrote:

> Although this cannot actually result in a race, because on cache
> destruction there should not be any concurrent frees or allocations from
> the cache, let's add spin_lock/unlock to free_partial() just to keep
> lockdep happy.

Please add a comment that says this in the source so we know why this was
added.
--
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/