Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754870Ab1DIRMU (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Apr 2011 13:12:20 -0400 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:56885 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754481Ab1DIRMS convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Apr 2011 13:12:18 -0400 Subject: Re: Q. locking order of dcache_lru_lock From: Peter Zijlstra To: "J. R. Okajima" Cc: Al Viro , Christoph Hellwig , Nick Piggin , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <9769.1302268831@jrobl> References: <9769.1302268831@jrobl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2011 19:12:13 +0200 Message-ID: <1302369133.2388.1.camel@twins> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.3 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 517 Lines: 11 On Fri, 2011-04-08 at 22:20 +0900, J. R. Okajima wrote: > > When spin_trylock(&dentry->d_lock) successfully acquired d_lock, does > the violation of locking order happen (or a deadlock, in worse case)? No, since a trylock never actually blocks a deadlock cannot occur. -- 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/