On 05/15/2014 04:07 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 05:17:35PM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote: >>> No, its perfectly fine to have a lock sequence abort with -EDEADLK. >>> Userspace should release its locks and re-attempt. >> >> I agree. If I can prove that it's actually a deadlock, and >> that unlock/relock will work to fix it, then we can arrange for glibc >> to return EDEADLK. > > The only reason the kernel would return EDEADLK is because its walked > the lock graph and determined its well, a deadlock.
Perfect. No further comments from me then. Cheers, Carlos. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/