From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: [RFC][PATCH 0/7] lockdep: Support recurise-read locks
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 11:45:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110417094505.865828233@chello.nl> (raw)
This series is a rebase of an earlier series by Gautham.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/5/11/203
I left out the second patch:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/5/11/205
Because I couldn't reconstruct the thinking there, nor could I find
a good reason for it. Furthermore, I added a patch at the start that
implements a few extra locking self-tests.
This series wants testing and the self-tests really want to be extended
to cover more of the recursive read lock to gain confidence that all
does indeed work as intended.
I've also rewritten most of the changelogs to (hopefully) be better.
next reply other threads:[~2011-04-17 9:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-17 9:45 Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2011-04-17 9:45 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/7] lockdep: Implement extra recursive-read lock tests Peter Zijlstra
2011-04-17 9:45 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/7] lockdep: Remove redundant read checks Peter Zijlstra
2011-04-18 14:28 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-04-17 9:45 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/7] lockdep: Annotate read/write states Peter Zijlstra
2011-04-18 13:34 ` Yong Zhang
2011-04-18 16:34 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-04-18 16:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-04-18 16:26 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-04-18 16:27 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-04-18 16:31 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-04-17 9:45 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/7] lockdep: Seperate lock ids for read/write acquires Peter Zijlstra
2011-04-18 16:46 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-04-18 16:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-04-18 17:33 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-04-18 22:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-04-17 9:45 ` [RFC][PATCH 5/7] lockdep: Rename lock_list::class Peter Zijlstra
2011-04-17 9:45 ` [RFC][PATCH 6/7] lockdep: Maintain rw_state entries in locklist Peter Zijlstra
2011-04-18 13:37 ` Yong Zhang
2011-04-17 9:45 ` [RFC][PATCH 7/7] lockdep: Consider the rw_state of lock while validating the chain Peter Zijlstra
2011-04-18 3:41 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/7] lockdep: Support recurise-read locks Tetsuo Handa
2011-04-22 7:19 ` Yong Zhang
2011-04-22 7:27 ` Yong Zhang
2011-04-22 7:44 ` Tetsuo Handa
2011-04-22 8:01 ` Yong Zhang
2011-04-22 8:31 ` Tetsuo Handa
2011-04-22 8:59 ` Yong Zhang
2011-04-22 9:19 ` Tetsuo Handa
2011-04-23 12:33 ` [PATCH] lockdep: ignore cached chain key for recursive read Yong Zhang
2011-04-23 13:04 ` Tetsuo Handa
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=20110417094505.865828233@chello.nl \
--to=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox