Re: [PATCH v3] lockdep: check that no locks held at freeze time

From: Ingo Molnar
Date: Wed Feb 20 2013 - 05:37:33 EST

* Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> We shouldn't try_to_freeze if locks are held. Verified that
> I get no lockdep warnings after applying this patch and
> "vfork: don't freezer_count() for in-kernel users of CLONE_VFORK".
> Changes since v1:
> * LKML: <20130215111635.GA26955@xxxxxxxxx> Ingo Molnar
> * Added a msg string that gets passed in.
> * LKML: <20130215154449.GD30829@xxxxxxxxxx> Oleg Nesterov
> * Check PF_NOFREEZE in try_to_freeze().
> Changes since v2:
> * LKML: <20130216170605.GC4910@xxxxxxxxxx> Oleg Nesterov
> * Avoid unnecessary PF_NOFREEZE check when !CONFIG_LOCKDEP.
> * Mandeep Singh Baines
> * Generalize an exit specific printk.
> Signed-off-by: Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx>
> CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>

Looks good to me now.

Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>

Which tree should this go through?


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at