Re: [RT] 5.9-rt14 softirq_ctrl.lock vs listening_hash[i].lock lockdep splat

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: Mike Galbraith <efault@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [RT] 5.9-rt14 softirq_ctrl.lock vs listening_hash[i].lock lockdep splat
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 11:32:42 +0100
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-rt-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, lkml <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@xxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>, Will Deacon <will@xxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <facf3c932c05cfc0c8287465a94f7919bbf6ad58.camel@gmx.de>
References: <12d6f9879a97cd56c09fb53dee343cbb14f7f1f7.camel@gmx.de> <X9CheYjuXWc75Spa@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <facf3c932c05cfc0c8287465a94f7919bbf6ad58.camel@gmx.de>

On 2020-12-09 11:25:34 [+0100], Mike Galbraith wrote:
> Sebastian fixed this via...

We still look if we go that road or update lockdep.

Sebastian

References:
- [RT] 5.9-rt14 softirq_ctrl.lock vs listening_hash[i].lock lockdep splat
  - From: Mike Galbraith
- Re: [RT] 5.9-rt14 softirq_ctrl.lock vs listening_hash[i].lock lockdep splat
  - From: Peter Zijlstra
- Re: [RT] 5.9-rt14 softirq_ctrl.lock vs listening_hash[i].lock lockdep splat
  - From: Mike Galbraith

Prev by Date: Re: [RT] 5.9-rt14 softirq_ctrl.lock vs listening_hash[i].lock lockdep splat
Next by Date: Re: [RT] 5.9-rt14 softirq_ctrl.lock vs listening_hash[i].lock lockdep splat
Previous by thread: Re: [RT] 5.9-rt14 softirq_ctrl.lock vs listening_hash[i].lock lockdep splat
Next by thread: Re: [RT] 5.9-rt14 softirq_ctrl.lock vs listening_hash[i].lock lockdep splat
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [RT Stable] [Kernel Newbies] [IDE] [Security] [Git] [Netfilter] [Bugtraq] [Yosemite] [Yosemite News] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Security] [Linux RAID] [Linux ATA RAID] [Samba] [Video 4 Linux] [Device Mapper]

Powered by Linux