All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Paul McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] lockdep: Introduce wait-type checks
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2014 10:40:41 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140112094041.GB31809@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140109170823.GF7572@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net>


* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:

> > But what I really can't understans is what "check == 0" means? It 
> > seems that in fact it can be 1 or 2? Or, iow, "check == 0" is 
> > actually equivalent to "check == 1" ?
> 
> Hmm indeed, the comment in lockdep.h says 0 means no checks at all, 
> but the code doesn't actually appear to work like that. I'm not sure 
> it ever did or not, I'd have to go dig through history.
> 
> That said, given the current state it certainly looks like we can 
> remove the check argument.
> 
> Ingo?

Agreed.

Thanks,

	Ingo

  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-01-12  9:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-01-09 11:15 [RFC][PATCH] lockdep: Introduce wait-type checks Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-09 11:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-09 16:31 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-01-09 17:08   ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-09 17:54     ` check && lockdep_no_validate (Was: lockdep: Introduce wait-type checks) Oleg Nesterov
2014-01-12 20:58       ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-13 16:07         ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-01-16 17:43           ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-01-16 18:09             ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-16 20:26               ` Alan Stern
2014-01-17 16:31                 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-01-17 18:01                   ` Alan Stern
2014-01-20 18:19                     ` [PATCH 0/5] lockdep: (Was: check && lockdep_no_validate) Oleg Nesterov
2014-01-20 18:20                       ` [PATCH 1/5] lockdep: make held_lock->check and "int check" argument bool Oleg Nesterov
2014-02-10 13:32                         ` [tip:core/locking] lockdep: Make " tip-bot for Oleg Nesterov
2014-01-20 18:20                       ` [PATCH 2/5] lockdep: don't create the wrong dependency on hlock->check == 0 Oleg Nesterov
2014-02-10 13:33                         ` [tip:core/locking] lockdep: Don' t " tip-bot for Oleg Nesterov
2014-01-20 18:20                       ` [PATCH 3/5] lockdep: change mark_held_locks() to check hlock->check instead of lockdep_no_validate Oleg Nesterov
2014-02-10 13:33                         ` [tip:core/locking] lockdep: Change " tip-bot for Oleg Nesterov
2014-01-20 18:20                       ` [PATCH 4/5] lockdep: change lockdep_set_novalidate_class() to use _and_name Oleg Nesterov
2014-02-10 13:33                         ` [tip:core/locking] lockdep: Change " tip-bot for Oleg Nesterov
2014-01-20 18:20                       ` [PATCH 5/5] lockdep: pack subclass/trylock/read/check into a single argument Oleg Nesterov
2014-01-21 14:10                         ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-21 17:27                           ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-01-21 17:35                           ` Dave Jones
2014-01-21 18:43                             ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-01-21 18:53                               ` Steven Rostedt
2014-01-21 20:06                                 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-01-21 19:39                               ` uninline rcu_lock_acquire/etc ? Oleg Nesterov
2014-01-22  3:54                                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-01-22 18:31                                   ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-01-22 19:34                                     ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-01-22 19:39                                       ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-01-20 18:37                       ` [PATCH 0/5] lockdep: (Was: check && lockdep_no_validate) Alan Stern
2014-01-20 18:54                         ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-01-20 21:42                           ` Alan Stern
2014-01-12  9:40     ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2014-01-12 17:45       ` [PATCH 0/1] lockdep: Kill held_lock->check and "int check" arg of __lock_acquire() Oleg Nesterov
2014-01-12 17:45         ` [PATCH 1/1] " Oleg Nesterov
2014-01-13  0:28           ` Dave Jones
2014-01-13 16:20             ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-01-13 17:06           ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-01-13 17:28             ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-13 18:52               ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-01-13 22:34               ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-01-12 20:00         ` [PATCH 0/1] " Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-13 18:35           ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-01-09 17:33 ` [RFC][PATCH] lockdep: Introduce wait-type checks Dave Jones
2014-01-09 22:12   ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-10 12:11   ` Peter Zijlstra

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20140112094041.GB31809@gmail.com \
    --to=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.