> There's apparently an ordering problem with dpm_list_mtx and > socket->skt_mutex. Lockdep details appended. > > Dominik, Rafael? What's the proper locking order here, and > how do we fix this? Thanks for noting this; let's see: - We add a PCMCIA device holding skt_mutex, therefore we have the ordering (1) skt_mutex -> (2) dpm_list_mtx - If we're suspending, dpm_list_mtx is held, but we need to acquire skt_mutex as we modify some data being protected by skt_mutex (1) dpm_list_mtx -> (2) skt_mutex Rafael, any idea on how to solve this? How do other subsystems handle such an issue? Do they call device_add() with no locks held at all? Best, Dominik _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
