From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
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: [PATCH 1/1] lockdep: Kill held_lock->check and "int check" arg of __lock_acquire()
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 17:20:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140113162040.GB7616@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140113002811.GA24735@redhat.com>
On 01/12, Dave Jones wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 06:45:54PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> > diff --git a/include/linux/lockdep.h b/include/linux/lockdep.h
> > index 92b1bfc..13bd13d 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/lockdep.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/lockdep.h
> > @@ -252,7 +252,6 @@ struct held_lock {
> > unsigned int trylock:1; /* 16 bits */
> >
> > unsigned int read:2; /* see lock_acquire() comment */
> > - unsigned int check:2; /* see lock_acquire() comment */
> > unsigned int hardirqs_off:1;
> > unsigned int references:11; /* 32 bits */
>
> The 'bits' comments seem to be crap, even before your patch.
Hmm, I didn't even notice them.
I think the comments were correct, note that the previous field is uint:13.
But after (with) this patch the width of "references" should be updated.
Thanks,
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-13 16:22 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 ` [RFC][PATCH] lockdep: Introduce wait-type checks Ingo Molnar
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 [this message]
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=20140113162040.GB7616@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--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.