From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: waitqueue lockdep annotation V3
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 16:24:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180717142437.GA20286@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180712191753.fvk2qersdvhcoqzp@linux-r8p5>
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 12:17:53PM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Dec 2017, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> this series adds a strategic lockdep_assert_held to __wake_up_common
>> to ensure callers really do hold the wait_queue_head lock when calling
>> the unlocked wake_up variants. It turns out epoll did not do this
>> for a fairly common path (hit all the time by systemd during bootup),
>> so the second patch fixed this instance as well.
>
> I ran into these changes because of patch 1 getting rid of ep->lock. Is
> there any reason why this series was never picked up?
I'd love to see this merged, but I never heard back about it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-07-17 14:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-12-14 15:23 waitqueue lockdep annotation V3 Christoph Hellwig
2017-12-14 15:23 ` [PATCH 1/3] epoll: use the waitqueue lock to protect ep->wq Christoph Hellwig
2017-12-14 15:23 ` [PATCH 2/3] userfaultfd: use fault_wqh lock Christoph Hellwig
2017-12-17 7:10 ` Mike Rapoport
2017-12-14 15:23 ` [PATCH 3/3] sched/wait: assert the wait_queue_head lock is held in __wake_up_common Christoph Hellwig
2018-07-12 19:17 ` waitqueue lockdep annotation V3 Davidlohr Bueso
2018-07-17 14:24 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2018-07-17 15:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-17 15:09 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=20180717142437.GA20286@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=jbaron@akamai.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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.