Message-ID: <48A104EB.6040509@tlinx.org>
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 20:35:07 -0700
From: Linda Walsh <lkml@tlinx.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (Windows/20080708)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>
CC: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, xfs-oss <xfs@oss.sgi.com>
Subject: Re: Lock debugging noise or real problem?
References: <48A093A7.40606@tlinx.org> <48A09CA9.9080705@sandeen.net> <48A0F686.2090700@tlinx.org> <48A0F9FC.1070805@sandeen.net>
In-Reply-To: <48A0F9FC.1070805@sandeen.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 926
Lines: 27

Eric Sandeen wrote:
> I haven't looked closely at #2 but there have been so many lockdep
> reports for xfs, and so many explanations of why they don't always get
> along, you'll probably be able to find something with some searching.
>   
----

      So in debugging mysterious 'lockups' where I've, at least once, 
noticed a
hangcheck_timer elapse, this lock-checking stuff is just nonsensical?  
It is very
frustrating trying to turn on debug tools in the kernel and get so many 
false positives.

Would it be possible or, perhaps, desirable to eliminate the buggy 
lock-checks in the
xfs code?

Meanwhile...back to finding reasons for the semi-random, periodic hanging...
;^/


--
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/