From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41F8EC433FE for ; Tue, 10 May 2022 23:28:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id C33CF6B0071; Tue, 10 May 2022 19:28:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id BBD276B0072; Tue, 10 May 2022 19:28:17 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id A84B36B0073; Tue, 10 May 2022 19:28:17 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0012.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.12]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9582F6B0071 for ; Tue, 10 May 2022 19:28:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin25.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay09.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41A4F323A5 for ; Tue, 10 May 2022 23:28:17 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79451424234.25.13E5DFC Received: from lgeamrelo11.lge.com (lgeamrelo11.lge.com [156.147.23.51]) by imf23.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52BC814009D for ; Tue, 10 May 2022 23:28:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from unknown (HELO lgemrelse7q.lge.com) (156.147.1.151) by 156.147.23.51 with ESMTP; 11 May 2022 08:28:11 +0900 X-Original-SENDERIP: 156.147.1.151 X-Original-MAILFROM: byungchul.park@lge.com Received: from unknown (HELO X58A-UD3R) (10.177.244.38) by 156.147.1.151 with ESMTP; 11 May 2022 08:28:11 +0900 X-Original-SENDERIP: 10.177.244.38 X-Original-MAILFROM: byungchul.park@lge.com Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 08:26:33 +0900 From: Byungchul Park To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, adilger.kernel@dilger.ca, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, will@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, joel@joelfernandes.org, sashal@kernel.org, daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch, chris@chris-wilson.co.uk, duyuyang@gmail.com, johannes.berg@intel.com, tj@kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu, willy@infradead.org, david@fromorbit.com, amir73il@gmail.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, kernel-team@lge.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mhocko@kernel.org, minchan@kernel.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, vdavydov.dev@gmail.com, sj@kernel.org, jglisse@redhat.com, dennis@kernel.org, cl@linux.com, penberg@kernel.org, rientjes@google.com, vbabka@suse.cz, ngupta@vflare.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, paolo.valente@linaro.org, josef@toxicpanda.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, jack@suse.cz, jack@suse.com, jlayton@kernel.org, dan.j.williams@intel.com, hch@infradead.org, djwong@kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, airlied@linux.ie, rodrigosiqueiramelo@gmail.com, melissa.srw@gmail.com, hamohammed.sa@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v6 00/21] DEPT(Dependency Tracker) Message-ID: <20220510232633.GA18445@X58A-UD3R> References: <1651795895-8641-1-git-send-email-byungchul.park@lge.com> <20220509001637.GA6047@X58A-UD3R> <20220509164712.746e236b@gandalf.local.home> <20220509233838.GC6047@X58A-UD3R> <20220510101254.33554885@gandalf.local.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220510101254.33554885@gandalf.local.home> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Authentication-Results: imf23.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; spf=pass (imf23.hostedemail.com: domain of byungchul.park@lge.com designates 156.147.23.51 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=byungchul.park@lge.com; dmarc=none X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam05 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 52BC814009D X-Stat-Signature: b96ujpuzgnoo5kak8cfxc5uppoc1j3qb X-HE-Tag: 1652225280-181462 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 10:12:54AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 10 May 2022 08:38:38 +0900 > Byungchul Park wrote: > > > Yes, I was talking about A and L'. > > > > > detect that regardless of L. A nested lock associates the the nesting with > > > > When I checked Lockdep code, L' with depth n + 1 and L' with depth n > > have different classes in Lockdep. > > If that's the case, then that's a bug in lockdep. Yes, agree. I should've said 'Lockdep doesn't detect it currently.' rather than 'Lockdep can't detect it.'. I also think we make it for this case by fixing the bug in Lockdep. > > > > That's why I said Lockdep cannot detect it. By any chance, has it > > changed so as to consider this case? Or am I missing something? > > No, it's not that lockdep cannot detect it, it should detect it. If it is > not detecting it, then we need to fix that. Yes. Byungchul > > -- Steve