On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 08:04:47PM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote: > So, the thing is there is no actual deadlock. If you're okay with releasing w/ > spurious lockdep warning, leaving things alone should be fine. An issue with > mst's patch is that it actually changes the behavior to avoid a spurious > warning. Yes but in fact, isn't it cleaner to avoid work_on if we are going to run on the local CPU, anyway? > An alternative course would be leaving it alone now and remove the > spurious warning during the coming devel cycle and mark it w/ -stable. > > Thanks. Okay. Could you send tested a version of work_on_nested? > -- > tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
