From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 12:48:37 -0500 From: Mike Snitzer To: Bart Van Assche Cc: "dm-devel@redhat.com" , "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" , "hare@suse.de" , "tom.leiming@gmail.com" , "djeffery@redhat.com" , "axboe@kernel.dk" Subject: Re: [for-4.16 PATCH v5 0/4] block/dm: allow DM to defer blk_register_queue() until ready Message-ID: <20180115174837.GA24981@redhat.com> References: <20180112150606.6037-1-snitzer@redhat.com> <1516036612.10386.2.camel@wdc.com> <20180115172928.GB24260@redhat.com> <1516037769.3951.12.camel@wdc.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1516037769.3951.12.camel@wdc.com> List-ID: On Mon, Jan 15 2018 at 12:36pm -0500, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On Mon, 2018-01-15 at 12:29 -0500, Mike Snitzer wrote: > > So you replied to v5, I emailed a v6 out for the relevant patch. Just > > want to make sure you're testing with either Jens' latest tree or are > > using my v6 that fixed blk_mq_unregister_dev() to require caller holds > > q->sysfs_lock ? > > Hello Mike, > > In my test I was using Jens' latest for-next tree (commit 563877ae7dae). OK, that includes his latest for-4.16/block (commit c100ec49fdd22228) so I'll take a closer look at this lockdep splat. Do I need to do something more to enable lockdep aside from set CONFIG_LOCKDEP_SUPPORT=y ? Thanks, Mike