From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jason Gunthorpe Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/5] kernel.h: Add non_block_start/end() Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 17:27:21 -0300 Message-ID: <20190815202721.GV21596@ziepe.ca> References: <20190815132127.GI9477@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20190815141219.GF21596@ziepe.ca> <20190815155950.GN9477@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20190815165631.GK21596@ziepe.ca> <20190815174207.GR9477@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20190815182448.GP21596@ziepe.ca> <20190815190525.GS9477@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20190815191810.GR21596@ziepe.ca> <20190815193526.GT9477@dhcp22.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Daniel Vetter Cc: Michal Hocko , Feng Tang , Randy Dunlap , Kees Cook , Masahiro Yamada , Peter Zijlstra , Intel Graphics Development , Jann Horn , LKML , DRI Development , Linux MM , =?utf-8?B?SsOpcsO0bWU=?= Glisse , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , David Rientjes , Wei Wang , Daniel Vetter , Andrew Morton , Andy Shevchenko List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 10:16:43PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > So if someone can explain to me how that works with lockdep I can of > course implement it. But afaics that doesn't exist (I tried to explain > that somewhere else already), and I'm no really looking forward to > hacking also on lockdep for this little series. Hmm, kind of looks like it is done by calling preempt_disable() Probably the debug option is CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT, not lockdep? Jason