Hi Andreas No, not those. We got a possible recursive locking on the adapter->request_queue.queue_lock Cheers Swen On Wednesday 07 February 2007 17:06, Andreas Herrmann wrote: > On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 01:17:57PM +0100, Swen Schillig wrote: > > From: Swen Schillig <swen@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Invalid locking order. Kernel hangs after trying to take two locks > > which are dependend on each other. Introducing temporary variable > > to free requests. Free lock after requests are copied. > > > > I am just curious. You didn't mention which locks are causing the dead > lock. > > I've glanced through the code and it seems that locking order > of abort_lock and req_list_lock for adapters is inconsistent. > Is that the bug you try to fix? > > > Regards, > > Andreas > > > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
