2014-08-26, 14:49:18 -0400, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: > On Tue, 26 Aug 2014 03:54:53 +0200, Samuel Thibault said: > > This changeset defers the second led_trigger_event call into a > > workqueue, which avoids the nested locking altogether. This does > > not prevent the user from shooting himself in the foot by creating a > > vt::capsl <-> vt-capsl loop, but the only consequence is the workqueue > > threads eating some CPU until the user breaks the loop, which is not too > > bad. > > > > Signed-off-by: Samuel Thibault <samuel.thiba...@ens-lyon.org> > > > > --- a/drivers/input/leds.c > > +++ b/drivers/input/leds.c > > @@ -100,13 +100,25 @@ static unsigned long vt_led_registered[B > > I admit having zero understanding of the code, but I can confirm that > next-20140825 still throws the lockdep whine I was seeing, but the same > tree with this patch on top of it boots without warning. Soo... > > Tested-By: Valdis Kletnieks <valdis.kletni...@vt.edu>
Same for me. Tested-by: Sabrina Dubroca <s...@queasysnail.net> Thanks, -- Sabrina -- 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/
