On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 06:44:00PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> 4.14-rc1 gained the fancy new cross-release support in lockdep, which
> seems to have uncovered a few more rules about what is allowed and
> isn't.
>
> This one here seems to indicate that allocating a work-queue while
> holding mmap
On 06/10/2017 15:23, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 12:34:02PM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
On 06/10/2017 10:06, Daniel Vetter wrote:
4.14-rc1 gained the fancy new cross-release support in lockdep, which
seems to have uncovered a few more rules about what is allowed and
isn't.
On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 12:34:02PM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>
> On 06/10/2017 10:06, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > 4.14-rc1 gained the fancy new cross-release support in lockdep, which
> > seems to have uncovered a few more rules about what is allowed and
> > isn't.
> >
> > This one here seems to
On 06/10/2017 10:06, Daniel Vetter wrote:
4.14-rc1 gained the fancy new cross-release support in lockdep, which
seems to have uncovered a few more rules about what is allowed and
isn't.
This one here seems to indicate that allocating a work-queue while
holding mmap_sem is a no-go, so let's try
Quoting Daniel Vetter (2017-10-06 10:06:36)
> 4.14-rc1 gained the fancy new cross-release support in lockdep, which
> seems to have uncovered a few more rules about what is allowed and
> isn't.
>
> This one here seems to indicate that allocating a work-queue while
> holding mmap_sem is a no-go, so
Quoting Daniel Vetter (2017-10-06 10:06:36)
> 4.14-rc1 gained the fancy new cross-release support in lockdep, which
> seems to have uncovered a few more rules about what is allowed and
> isn't.
>
> This one here seems to indicate that allocating a work-queue while
> holding mmap_sem is a no-go, so
