From: Krzysztof H. <krz...@po...> - 2009-06-02 15:02:23
|
On Mon, 1 Jun 2009 13:38:40 -0700 (PDT) Linus Torvalds <tor...@li...> wrote: > > > On Mon, 1 Jun 2009, Krzysztof Helt wrote: > > If the revert to BKL is rejected this patch may wait till 2.6.31. > > Ahh, so this one helps clean up locking, but doesn't fix any actual > regressions? I was going to ask you about that. > There is a problem with multihead configuration with and without the patch. I realize that it is late stage of the 2.6.30 so IMO it is not worth pushing it at this moment . The patch is quite an improvement for smem_start/smem_len handling so it should find its way into the tree. > Btw - one thing you could try on the whole lockdep front - and I realize > that this is a _total_ hack - is to try the patch below. > > The _only_ thing it does is to hide the sysfs_mutex -> mm_lock chain from > lockdep, by using the (incorrect) __copy_to_user_inatomic() instead of the > (correct) copy_to_user(). But I'd like to hear if that sysfs_mutex in > readdir is the only way you can get a chain. > I'll test this. Best regards, Krzysztof ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Chcesz miec nawigacje GPS ? Zamow lub przedluz umowe na neostrade, a nawigacja bedzie Twoja. Kliknij na link po szczegoly! http://link.interia.pl/f219a |