Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 7 Dec 2010 12:41:21 +0100
From:      Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org>
To:        Erik Cederstrand <erik@cederstrand.dk>
Cc:        Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com>, freebsd-current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Lock order reversal .
Message-ID:  <AANLkTimUQpQKBKb0FTqo_VjSCSDYAg9BkQEQ5197KsD4@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <E00F6925-CEFD-465F-925F-5614210166CC@cederstrand.dk>
References:  <AANLkTin3njw-_4HRDw2en68LYhPC_XBDtXZp9U8gr3az@mail.gmail.com> <44B787D8-243C-4880-A532-261435C89940@gmail.com> <E00F6925-CEFD-465F-925F-5614210166CC@cederstrand.dk>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
2010/12/7 Erik Cederstrand <erik@cederstrand.dk>:
>
> Den 07/12/2010 kl. 10.20 skrev Garrett Cooper:
>
>> On Dec 7, 2010, at 12:26 AM, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk <m.e.sanliturk@gmail.=
com> wrote:
>>
>>> A Dmesg.TXT is attached having a lock order reversal .
>>
>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0The mount LOR is well known.
>
> I see that this is the standard response to lot's of LOR reports. It seem=
s to be one of the most-reported errors on CURRENT (and it's certainly a lo=
ud one), but I think a lot of people waste time researching the error and b=
rowsing Bjoerns LOR page, only to get the above response (not picking on yo=
u, Garrett).
>
> Do we have the possibility of silencing well-known and presumably harmles=
s LOR's if there isn't sufficient motivation to fix the source?

Witness has an 'internal blessing list' we never wanted to use in
order to keep them popping up as reminder.
Actually, the fact the LOR is 'known' doesn't mean it is 'analyzed'.
The very few 'Analyzed but harmless' cases in the past have been
handled via _NOWITNESS flags I guess.

Attilio


--=20
Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTimUQpQKBKb0FTqo_VjSCSDYAg9BkQEQ5197KsD4>