On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 3:07 AM, Jeff Layton wrote:
> On Mon, 6 May 2013 16:50:07 -0700
> Colin Cross wrote:
>
>> CIFS calls wait_event_freezekillable_unsafe with a VFS lock held,
>> which is unsafe and will cause lockdep warnings when 6aa9707
>> "lockdep: check that no locks held at freeze time"
On Mon 2013-05-06 16:50:07, Colin Cross wrote:
> CIFS calls wait_event_freezekillable_unsafe with a VFS lock held,
> which is unsafe and will cause lockdep warnings when 6aa9707
> "lockdep: check that no locks held at freeze time" is reapplied
> (it was reverted in dbf520a). CIFS shouldn't be doin
On Mon, 6 May 2013 16:50:07 -0700
Colin Cross wrote:
> CIFS calls wait_event_freezekillable_unsafe with a VFS lock held,
> which is unsafe and will cause lockdep warnings when 6aa9707
> "lockdep: check that no locks held at freeze time" is reapplied
> (it was reverted in dbf520a). CIFS shouldn'
CIFS calls wait_event_freezekillable_unsafe with a VFS lock held,
which is unsafe and will cause lockdep warnings when 6aa9707
"lockdep: check that no locks held at freeze time" is reapplied
(it was reverted in dbf520a). CIFS shouldn't be doing this, but
it has long-running syscalls that must hold
4 matches
Mail list logo