aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/virt
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorPeter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>2008-08-11 09:30:22 +0200
committerIngo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>2008-08-11 09:30:22 +0200
commit1b12bbc747560ea68bcc132c3d05699e52271da0 (patch)
tree0e0fe5b7fe07d411251eebdd053e9e7793820248 /virt
parent64aa348edc617dea17bbd01ddee4e47886d5ec8c (diff)
downloadkernel_samsung_smdk4412-1b12bbc747560ea68bcc132c3d05699e52271da0.zip
kernel_samsung_smdk4412-1b12bbc747560ea68bcc132c3d05699e52271da0.tar.gz
kernel_samsung_smdk4412-1b12bbc747560ea68bcc132c3d05699e52271da0.tar.bz2
lockdep: re-annotate scheduler runqueues
Instead of using a per-rq lock class, use the regular nesting operations. However, take extra care with double_lock_balance() as it can release the already held rq->lock (and therefore change its nesting class). So what can happen is: spin_lock(rq->lock); // this rq subclass 0 double_lock_balance(rq, other_rq); // release rq // acquire other_rq->lock subclass 0 // acquire rq->lock subclass 1 spin_unlock(other_rq->lock); leaving you with rq->lock in subclass 1 So a subsequent double_lock_balance() call can try to nest a subclass 1 lock while already holding a subclass 1 lock. Fix this by introducing double_unlock_balance() which releases the other rq's lock, but also re-sets the subclass for this rq's lock to 0. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Diffstat (limited to 'virt')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions