On 05.06.2011 17:13, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Arne Jansen<lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:sched.c:934: in function __task_rq_lock lockdep_assert_held(&p->pi_lock);Oh. Could you remove that line with the patch below - does it result in a working system?
yes.
Now, this patch alone just removes a debugging check - but i'm not
sure the debugging check is correct - we take the pi_lock in a raw
way - which means it's not lockdep covered.
So how can lockdep_assert_held() be called on it?
Thanks,
Ingo
diff --git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c
index fd18f39..a32316b 100644
--- a/kernel/sched.c
+++ b/kernel/sched.c
@@ -938,8 +938,6 @@ static inline struct rq *__task_rq_lock(struct task_struct *p)
{
struct rq *rq;
- lockdep_assert_held(&p->pi_lock);
-
for (;;) {
rq = task_rq(p);
raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tip-commits" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|