From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932324AbWGEH4F (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Jul 2006 03:56:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932356AbWGEH4F (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Jul 2006 03:56:05 -0400 Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.182]:30377 "EHLO py-out-1112.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932324AbWGEH4E (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Jul 2006 03:56:04 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=dYTpL7mEW688NqQmaHaixiAwPz1YNLGnXupogIEu8YJfo/bKYn/kIU4+g8/+WqPFk41CVKSwYnMfdv3LJdlsBVNt/opcDVFGfItLgP4oufBezE+pLjCFzRTckCULLw6zJhnhwIKq5L3zBGnQj6mSJEJ+G/Cbrymd5CvRE0N7v8E= Message-ID: Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2006 00:56:03 -0700 From: "Miles Lane" To: "Ingo Molnar" Subject: Re: 2.6.17-mm4 + hostap + pcmcia + lockdep -- possible recursive locking detected -- (af_callback_keys + sk->sk_family#3){-.-?}, at: [] sock_def_readable+0x15/0x69 Cc: "Andrew Morton" , LKML , "Arjan van de Ven" In-Reply-To: <20060703061030.GA16046@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20060702132946.GA25420@elte.hu> <20060702133451.GA27425@elte.hu> <20060703061030.GA16046@elte.hu> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 7/2/06, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Miles Lane wrote: > > > >> ok, lockdep should allow same-class read-lock recursion too, because > > >> it's used by real code and is being relied upon. Could you try the patch > > >> below? [...] > > > > > >the patches are also included in the latest -mm5 combo patch at: > > > > > > http://redhat.com/~mingo/lockdep-patches/lockdep-combo-2.6.17-mm5.patch > > > > I have not seen this particular INFO message show up again. > > you know that the validator produces only one message per bootup, right? > So unless you rebooted meanwhile, not seeing more messages after the > first one is normal. > > > Therefore, I haven't tested your latest patch yet. I wanted to > > determine whether this problem would occur often. If you like I can > > go ahead and test the patch anyhow. I am currently testing mm5 + the > > pcmcia patch and the hostap patch. I am looking into a crashing > > (system lockup) bug that is triggered by removing my Linksys USB > > 10/100 Ethernet adapter. This problem is 100% repeatable. I am > > working on setting up a remote debugging configuration. > > > > Would you like me to go ahead and test your latest patch? > > no hurries - just pick it up whenever you go to a new kernel. Looks good here. Thanks! Miles