Re: [linux-pm] [GIT PULL] One more power management fix for 2.6.37

[Dominik Brodowski]

> There's apparently an ordering problem with dpm_list_mtx and
> socket->skt_mutex. Lockdep details appended.
> 
> Dominik, Rafael? What's the proper locking order here, and
> how do we fix this?

Thanks for noting this; let's see:

- We add a PCMCIA device holding skt_mutex, therefore we have the ordering
  (1) skt_mutex -> (2) dpm_list_mtx

- If we're suspending, dpm_list_mtx is held, but we need to acquire
  skt_mutex as we modify some data being protected by skt_mutex
  (1) dpm_list_mtx -> (2) skt_mutex

Rafael, any idea on how to solve this? How do other subsystems handle such
an issue? Do they call device_add() with no locks held at all?

Best,
	Dominik
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/