On 2015/05/18, 3:21 PM, "Dan Carpenter" <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 08:34:51PM +0200, Adrian Remonda wrote: >> Fixed sparse warning: context imbalance in 'nrs_resource_put_safe' - >> 'different lock contexts for basic block' by releasing the lock on each >> iteration of the for loop. >> > >That changelog doesn't sound correct at all. That's not a correct >motivation or explanation. > >I reviewed the patch and it's likely going to cause dead locks. The code >is trying to take the spinlock for the first pointer in the array and >release it at the end. Now it takes the first pointer's spinlock a >bunch of times (dead lock) and releases it once (will not happen because >we are already dead). It isn't clear to me what the checkpatch complaint actually means? Is it that the spin_lock() and spin_unlock() calls have different amounts of indentation? Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger Lustre Software Architect Intel High Performance Data Division _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
