Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S269023AbUIHDgc (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Sep 2004 23:36:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S269024AbUIHDgc (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Sep 2004 23:36:32 -0400 Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:10149 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S269023AbUIHDg2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Sep 2004 23:36:28 -0400 Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2004 04:36:28 +0100 From: viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk To: Dawson Engler Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, developers@coverity.com Subject: Re: [CHECKER] possible reiserfs deadlock in 2.6.8.1 Message-ID: <20040908033628.GV23987@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 734 Lines: 16 On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 08:16:53PM -0700, Dawson Engler wrote: > Hi All, > > below is a possible deadlock in the linux-2.6.8.1 reiserfs code found by > a static deadlock checker I'm writing. Let me know if it looks valid > and/or whether the output is too cryptic. Note, one of the locks is > through a struct pointer, so the deadlock depends on both acquisitions > being to the same struct. Not valid, for the same reason as the above. BKL and down() do not form a mutual deadlock. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/