From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>,
Byungchul Park <max.byungchul.park@gmail.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
david@fromorbit.com,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
oleg@redhat.com, kernel-team@lge.com, daniel@ffwll.ch
Subject: Re: About the try to remove cross-release feature entirely by Ingo
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2017 17:40:28 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171230224028.GC3366@thunk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171230204417.GF27959@bombadil.infradead.org>
On Sat, Dec 30, 2017 at 12:44:17PM -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>
> I'm not sure I agree with this part. What if we add a new TCP lock class
> for connections which are used for filesystems/network block devices/...?
> Yes, it'll be up to each user to set the lockdep classification correctly,
> but that's a relatively small number of places to add annotations,
> and I don't see why it wouldn't work.
I was exagerrating a bit for effect, I admit. (but only a bit).
It can probably be for all TCP connections that are used by kernel
code (as opposed to userspace-only TCP connections). But it would
probably have to be each and every device-mapper instance, each and
every block device, each and every mounted file system, each and every
bdi object, etc.
The point I was trying to drive home is that "all we have to do is
just classify everything well or just invalidate the right lock
objects" is a massive understatement of the complexity level of what
would be required, or the number of locks/completion handlers that
would have to be blacklisted.
- Ted
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>,
Byungchul Park <max.byungchul.park@gmail.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
david@fromorbit.com,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
oleg@redhat.com, kernel-team@lge.com, daniel@ffwll.ch
Subject: Re: About the try to remove cross-release feature entirely by Ingo
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2017 17:40:28 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171230224028.GC3366@thunk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171230204417.GF27959@bombadil.infradead.org>
On Sat, Dec 30, 2017 at 12:44:17PM -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>
> I'm not sure I agree with this part. What if we add a new TCP lock class
> for connections which are used for filesystems/network block devices/...?
> Yes, it'll be up to each user to set the lockdep classification correctly,
> but that's a relatively small number of places to add annotations,
> and I don't see why it wouldn't work.
I was exagerrating a bit for effect, I admit. (but only a bit).
It can probably be for all TCP connections that are used by kernel
code (as opposed to userspace-only TCP connections). But it would
probably have to be each and every device-mapper instance, each and
every block device, each and every mounted file system, each and every
bdi object, etc.
The point I was trying to drive home is that "all we have to do is
just classify everything well or just invalidate the right lock
objects" is a massive understatement of the complexity level of what
would be required, or the number of locks/completion handlers that
would have to be blacklisted.
- Ted
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-12-30 22:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 82+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-12-13 6:24 About the try to remove cross-release feature entirely by Ingo Byungchul Park
2017-12-13 6:24 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-13 7:13 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-13 7:13 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-13 15:23 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-12-13 15:23 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-12-14 3:07 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-14 3:07 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-14 5:58 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-14 5:58 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-14 11:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-14 11:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-14 13:30 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-14 13:30 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-13 10:46 ` [PATCH] locking/lockdep: Remove the cross-release locking checks Ingo Molnar
2017-12-13 10:46 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-12-13 10:46 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-12-14 5:01 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-14 5:01 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-15 4:05 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-15 4:05 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-15 6:24 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-15 6:24 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-15 7:38 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-15 7:38 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-15 8:39 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-15 8:39 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-15 21:15 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-15 21:15 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-16 2:41 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-16 2:41 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-29 1:47 ` About the try to remove cross-release feature entirely by Ingo Byungchul Park
2017-12-29 1:47 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-29 2:02 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-29 2:02 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-29 3:51 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-29 3:51 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-29 7:28 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-29 7:28 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-30 6:16 ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-30 6:16 ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-30 15:40 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-30 15:40 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-30 20:44 ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-30 20:44 ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-30 22:40 ` Theodore Ts'o [this message]
2017-12-30 22:40 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-30 23:00 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-30 23:00 ` Theodore Ts'o
2018-01-01 10:18 ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-01-01 10:18 ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-01-01 16:00 ` Theodore Ts'o
2018-01-01 16:00 ` Theodore Ts'o
2018-01-03 2:38 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03 2:38 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03 2:28 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03 2:28 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03 2:58 ` Dave Chinner
2018-01-03 2:58 ` Dave Chinner
2018-01-03 5:48 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03 5:48 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-05 16:49 ` J. Bruce Fields
2018-01-05 16:49 ` J. Bruce Fields
2018-01-05 17:05 ` J. Bruce Fields
2018-01-05 17:05 ` J. Bruce Fields
2018-01-03 2:10 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03 2:10 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03 7:05 ` Theodore Ts'o
2018-01-03 7:05 ` Theodore Ts'o
2018-01-03 8:10 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03 8:10 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03 8:23 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03 8:23 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03 8:23 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03 1:57 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03 1:57 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-02 7:57 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-02 7:57 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-29 8:09 ` Amir Goldstein
2017-12-29 8:09 ` Amir Goldstein
2017-12-29 9:46 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-29 9:46 ` Byungchul Park
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=20171230224028.GC3366@thunk.org \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=byungchul.park@lge.com \
--cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=kernel-team@lge.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=max.byungchul.park@gmail.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.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.