On Wed, 2012-03-14 at 13:20 -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > I don't know how to prevent lockdep from complaining about this sort of > thing. It can't lead to a genuine deadlock, because a thread never > tries to acquire more than one of these dev_mutex things unless it's > already holding the device lock. > > Peter, any ideas? Sounds like you want: mutex_lock_nest_lock(&us->dev_mutex, &device->mutex); That tells lockdep you can hold multiple us->dev_mutex instances if you're holding device->mutex. Proper consideration is needed since this annotation can annotate an actual deadlock away, it does not verify device->mutex does indeed serialize all such multiple-instance acquisitions. It takes your word for it. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
