From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
John Ogness <john.ogness@linutronix.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] printk_legacy_map: use LD_WAIT_CONFIG instead of LD_WAIT_SLEEP
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2025 13:00:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251024110004.GF771@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251024105222.RZPI5xWT@linutronix.de>
On 10/24, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>
> On 2025-10-24 12:40:56 [+0200], Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 10/23, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > >
> > > On 2025-10-23 12:32:34 [+0200], Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > > printk_legacy_map is used on !PREEMPT_RT to avoid false positives from
> > > > CONFIG_PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING about raw_spinlock/spinlock nesting.
> > >
> > > Could we please get rid of CONFIG_PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING here? This is
> > > lockdep internal implementation and has nothing to do with printk or
> > > anything.
> >
> > OK, but let me ensure I didn't miss something (again ;).
> >
> > I mentioned CONFIG_PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING in the changelog because if
> > CONFIG_PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING=n, then LD_WAIT_CONFIG == LD_WAIT_SPIN
> > and lockdep will not complain if spinlock_t nests inside raw_spinlock_t.
> >
> > IOW, without CONFIG_PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING printk_legacy_map is not
> > really needed.
>
> This is correct but CONFIG_PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING is kind of a must and
> should not be an option.
Yes, I see your point. Just wanted to ensure I fully understand it.
Thanks,
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-24 11:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-22 15:41 [PATCH] printk_legacy_map: use LD_WAIT_CONFIG instead of LD_WAIT_SLEEP Oleg Nesterov
2025-10-23 7:49 ` Petr Mladek
2025-10-23 8:58 ` John Ogness
2025-10-23 10:28 ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-10-23 9:28 ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-10-23 10:32 ` [PATCH v2] " Oleg Nesterov
2025-10-23 14:26 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-10-23 15:06 ` John Ogness
2025-10-23 15:11 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-10-23 15:46 ` John Ogness
2025-10-23 15:46 ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-10-23 19:14 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-10-24 9:35 ` Petr Mladek
2025-10-24 10:38 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-10-24 12:57 ` Petr Mladek
2025-10-24 15:15 ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-10-24 10:40 ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-10-24 10:52 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-10-24 11:00 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2025-10-26 15:07 ` [PATCH v3] " Oleg Nesterov
2025-10-27 8:28 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-10-27 8:37 ` John Ogness
2025-10-29 13:15 ` Petr Mladek
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=20251024110004.GF771@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=john.ogness@linutronix.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pmladek@suse.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).