Re: [PATCH] mm: shmem: Correctly annotate new inodes

On Tue, Aug 14 2018, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote: > Directories and inodes don't necessarily need to be in the same > lockdep class. For ex, hugetlbfs splits them out too to prevent > false positives in lockdep. Annotate correctly after new inode > creation. If its a directory inode, it will be

Re: [PATCH] mm: shmem: Correctly annotate new inodes

On Tue, Aug 14 2018, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote: > Directories and inodes don't necessarily need to be in the same > lockdep class. For ex, hugetlbfs splits them out too to prevent > false positives in lockdep. Annotate correctly after new inode > creation. If its a directory inode, it will be

[PATCH] mm: shmem: Correctly annotate new inodes

Directories and inodes don't necessarily need to be in the same lockdep class. For ex, hugetlbfs splits them out too to prevent false positives in lockdep. Annotate correctly after new inode creation. If its a directory inode, it will be put into a different class. This should fix a lockdep splat

[PATCH] mm: shmem: Correctly annotate new inodes

Directories and inodes don't necessarily need to be in the same lockdep class. For ex, hugetlbfs splits them out too to prevent false positives in lockdep. Annotate correctly after new inode creation. If its a directory inode, it will be put into a different class. This should fix a lockdep splat