Re: + shmem-fix-faulting-into-a-hole-while-its-punched-take-2.patch added to -mm tree
From: Sasha Levin
Date: Sun Jul 13 2014 - 17:44:18 EST
On 07/11/2014 11:59 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> I agree with you that "The call trace is very clear on it that its not", but
>>> > > when you have 500 call traces you really want something better than going
>>> > > through it one call trace at a time.
>> > Points well made, and I strongly agree with Vlastimil and Sasha.
>> > There is a world of difference between a lock wanted and a lock held,
>> > and for the display of locks "held" to conceal that difference is unhelpful.
>> > It just needs one greppable word to distinguish the cases.
> So for the actual locking scenario it doesn't make a difference one way
> or another. These threads all can/could/will acquire the lock
> (eventually), so all their locking chains should be considered.
I think that the difference here is that we're not actually debugging a locking
issue, we're merely using lockdep to help with figuring out a non-locking
related bug and finding it difficult because lockdep's list of "held locks"
is really a lie :)
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/