On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 09:06:37AM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 09:48:40AM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 11:59:34PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > If that semaphore is being used as a mutex then we should convert it to > > > a mutex (dammit). > > > > Right. > > > > > Leaving it implemented as a semphore is not the proper way of > > > suppressing the lockdep warnings. It would be better to convert it to > > > a mutex then add suitable (and suitably commented) open-coded lockdep > > > annotations to suppress the runtime warnings. > > > > We don't even have to go that far. Here's all that's needed: > > > > diff -u a/drivers/base/class.c b/drivers/base/class.c > > --- a/drivers/base/class.c > > +++ b/drivers/base/class.c > > @@ -134,7 +134,7 @@ > > } > > } > > > > -int class_register(struct class *cls) > > +int __class_register(struct class *cls, struct lock_class_key *key) > > Sorry, this will not work properly, as class_create() is now more > commonly called, and it calls class_register() from within the driver > core. So there would be a lot of classes with the same "key" because of > this. > > So try changing class_create also. Oh forget it, I'm messing around in this area anyway, so all of these changes are not going to apply to tomorrow's -next tree at all. I'll take this and get it working, give me a bit... thanks, greg k-h -- 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
