On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 10:31:18AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 02:57:25AM +0200, Eugeniu Rosca wrote:
> > diff --git a/include/linux/lockdep.h b/include/linux/lockdep.h
> > index 6fc77d4dbdcd..eeed7ea2e198 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/lockdep.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/l
On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 02:57:25AM +0200, Eugeniu Rosca wrote:
> diff --git a/include/linux/lockdep.h b/include/linux/lockdep.h
> index 6fc77d4dbdcd..eeed7ea2e198 100644
> --- a/include/linux/lockdep.h
> +++ b/include/linux/lockdep.h
> @@ -186,6 +186,10 @@ struct lock_list {
> struct list_hea
Analyzing the "circular locking dependency" splat [2], I can see
the following skeleton/pattern:
is trying to acquire lock X.
*same* has previously acquired lock Y.
lock Y depends on lock X (hence chance for deadlock).
Print lock dependency chain:
-> #N (lock-name-N){lock-
3 matches
Mail list logo