From 26575e28df5eb2050c02369843faba38cecb4d8c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Peter Zijlstra Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 14:53:24 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] lockdep: remove extra "irq" string Impact: clarify lockdep printk text print_irq_inversion_bug() gets handed state strings of the form "HARDIRQ", "SOFTIRQ", "RECLAIM_FS" and appends "-irq-{un,}safe" to them, which is either redudant for *IRQ or confusing in the RECLAIM_FS case. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra LKML-Reference: <1236175192.5330.7585.camel@laptop> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar --- kernel/lockdep.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/lockdep.c b/kernel/lockdep.c index ef6584fd9fe5..02014f7ccc86 100644 --- a/kernel/lockdep.c +++ b/kernel/lockdep.c @@ -1900,9 +1900,9 @@ print_irq_inversion_bug(struct task_struct *curr, struct lock_class *other, curr->comm, task_pid_nr(curr)); print_lock(this); if (forwards) - printk("but this lock took another, %s-irq-unsafe lock in the past:\n", irqclass); + printk("but this lock took another, %s-unsafe lock in the past:\n", irqclass); else - printk("but this lock was taken by another, %s-irq-safe lock in the past:\n", irqclass); + printk("but this lock was taken by another, %s-safe lock in the past:\n", irqclass); print_lock_name(other); printk("\n\nand interrupts could create inverse lock ordering between them.\n\n"); -- 2.39.5