From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail143.messagelabs.com (mail143.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.35]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BBE896B0044 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:31:05 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 13:30:50 -0600 (CST) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: lockdep complaints in slab allocator In-Reply-To: <1259002800.5630.1.camel@penberg-laptop> Message-ID: References: <20091118181202.GA12180@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <84144f020911192249l6c7fa495t1a05294c8f5b6ac8@mail.gmail.com> <1258709153.11284.429.camel@laptop> <84144f020911200238w3d3ecb38k92ca595beee31de5@mail.gmail.com> <1258714328.11284.522.camel@laptop> <4B067816.6070304@cs.helsinki.fi> <1258729748.4104.223.camel@laptop> <1259002800.5630.1.camel@penberg-laptop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Pekka Enberg Cc: Peter Zijlstra , paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, mpm@selenic.com, LKML , Nick Piggin List-ID: On Mon, 23 Nov 2009, Pekka Enberg wrote: > That turns out to be _very_ hard. How about something like the following > untested patch which delays slab_destroy() while we're under nc->lock. Code changes to deal with a diagnostic issue? -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org