On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 10:04:05AM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote: > On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 9:52 AM, Linus Torvalds > <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 9:19 AM, Russell King <rmk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> So... what you seem to be telling me is that 3.9 is going to be a > >> release which issues lockdep complaints when the console blanks, and > >> you think that's acceptable? > >> > >> Adding Linus and Andrew so they're aware of this issue... > > > > Oh, we're extremely aware of it. And it's not a new issue, the locking > > problem have apparently been around forever, although I'm not sure why > > the lockdep splat itself started happening only recently. > > > > They'll make it into 3.9, it's 3.8 that won't have them. The patches > > initially caused way *worse* behavior than just a lockdep splat - they > > caused actual hard lockups (and that was *after* the initial series of > > fixes). That got fixed (hopefully for the last case!) fairly recently, > > and I'm not willing to take the scary patch-series that has had > > several problem cases. > > Well we didn't have any lock validation support before Daniel added it > a couple of kernels back, > so instead of hidden locking problems we've had from time began, we now have > lockdep detectable locking problems. Which may or may not be a good thing depending how you look at it; it means that once your kernel blanks, you get a lockdep dump. At that point you lose lockdep checking for everything else because lockdep disables itself after the first dump. -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
