Re: bd_mount_mutex -> bd_mount_sem (was Re: xfs_file_ioctl / xfs_freeze: BUG: warning at kernel/mutex-debug.c:80/debug_mutex_unlock())
From: Andrew Morton <hidden>
Date: 2007-01-09 03:18:10
Also in:
lkml
On Mon, 08 Jan 2007 21:12:40 -0600 Eric Sandeen [off-list ref] wrote:
Andrew Morton wrote:quoted
On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 10:47:28 +1100 David Chinner [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 10:40:54AM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:quoted
Sami Farin wrote:quoted
On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 08:37:34 +1100, David Chinner wrote: ...quoted
quoted
fstab was there just fine after -u.Oh, that still hasn't been fixed?Looked like it =)Hm, it was proposed upstream a while ago: http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/9/27/137 I guess it got lost?Seems like it. Andrew, did this ever get queued for merge?Seems not. I think people were hoping that various nasties in there would go away. We return to userspace with a kernel lock held??Is a semaphore any worse than the current mutex in this respect? At least unlocking from another thread doesn't violate semaphore rules. :)
I assume that if we weren't returning to userspace with a lock held, this mutex problem would simply go away.