From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756198Ab0EXHUD (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 May 2010 03:20:03 -0400 Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk ([78.32.30.218]:58402 "EHLO caramon.arm.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756085Ab0EXHUA (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 May 2010 03:20:00 -0400 Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 08:19:21 +0100 From: Russell King - ARM Linux To: Ming Lei Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-embedded@vger.kernel.org, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH] ARM: fix 'unannotated irqs-on' lockdep warning Message-ID: <20100524071921.GA17528@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1274615328-27953-1-git-send-email-tom.leiming@gmail.com> <20100523123801.GC950@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20100523141300.GD950@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20100523194746.GE950@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20100524112355.18424622@tom-lei> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100524112355.18424622@tom-lei> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 11:23:55AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > On Sun, 23 May 2010 20:47:46 +0100 > Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > Moreover, I put to you that it's utterly pointless - and a waste of > > CPU time - telling lockdep about the IRQ masking when an exception > > Yes, the patch still tries to remove the pointless trace of IRQ masking, > such as: replace disable_irq with disable_irq_notrace. > > > occurs, and it's also pointless telling lockdep about the IRQ > > unmasking when we resume userspace. > > Even it is pointless, but if lockdep doesn't see the IRQ unmasking, the > warning "unannotated irqs-on" will be triggered and lockdep doe not work > any longer, so we have to remove the warning to make lockdep workable on > ARM, could you agree on it? It is the main purpose of the patch. I'm sorry, I think we have a communication issue; you're not understanding the points that I'm making. I feel I'm wasting my time trying to explain it. I'm not merging your patch as-is because I believe it to be wrong.