From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: "Américo Wang" <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>,
"Neil Brown" <neilb@suse.de>,
"Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@suse.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sysfs: differentiate between locking links and non-links
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 19:39:58 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B728CFE.40208@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m1vde57c11.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org>
On 02/10/2010 05:03 PM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> writes:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> On 02/10/2010 11:08 AM, Américo Wang wrote:
>>> This bug report is new for me. Recently we received lots of sysfs lockdep
>>> warnings, I am working on a patch to fix all the bogus ones.
>>>
>>> However, this one is _not_ similar to the other cases, as you decribed.
>>> This patch could fix the problem, but not a good fix, IMO. We need more
>>> work in sysfs layer to fix this kind of things. I will take care of this.
>>
>> Can't we just give each s_active lock a separate class? Would that be
>> too costly?
>
> When I asked the question earlier I was told that that locking classes
> require static storage. Where would that static storage come from?
Maybe I'm glossly misunderstanding it but wouldn't embedding struct
lockdep_map into sysfs_node as in work_struct do the trick?
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-02-10 10:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-02-10 1:09 [PATCH] sysfs: differentiate between locking links and non-links Neil Brown
2010-02-10 1:21 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-10 1:56 ` Américo Wang
2010-02-10 3:05 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-10 3:14 ` Américo Wang
2010-02-10 3:19 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-10 3:33 ` Américo Wang
2010-02-10 2:08 ` Américo Wang
2010-02-10 2:19 ` Tejun Heo
2010-02-10 3:12 ` Américo Wang
2010-02-10 8:03 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-10 10:39 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2010-02-10 18:25 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-10 23:05 ` Greg KH
2010-02-11 1:31 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-11 2:10 ` Tejun Heo
2010-02-11 18:08 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-12 0:59 ` Tejun Heo
2010-02-12 1:20 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-12 1:20 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-12 2:16 ` Tejun Heo
2010-02-11 23:13 ` [PATCH 0/4] Better sysfs lockdep Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-11 23:14 ` [PATCH 1/4] sysfs: Remove sysfs_get/put_active_two Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-11 23:20 ` [PATCH 2/4] sysfs: Only take active references on attributes Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-11 23:21 ` [PATCH 3/4] sysfs: Use one lockdep class per sysfs attribute Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-11 23:23 ` [PATCH 4/4] sysfs: Use sysfs_attr_init and sysfs_bin_attr_init on dynamic attributes Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-11 23:42 ` Greg KH
2010-02-12 12:47 ` [PATCH] sysfs: Document sysfs_attr_init and sysfs_bin_attr_init Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-12 21:41 ` [PATCH] sysfs: Use sysfs_attr_init and sysfs_bin_attr_init on module dynamic attributes Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-15 10:38 ` [PATCH 4/4] sysfs: Use sysfs_attr_init and sysfs_bin_attr_init on " Américo Wang
2010-02-15 12:53 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-15 10:35 ` [PATCH 3/4] sysfs: Use one lockdep class per sysfs attribute Américo Wang
2010-02-15 7:27 ` [PATCH 2/4] sysfs: Only take active references on attributes Américo Wang
2010-02-15 8:15 ` Américo Wang
2010-02-15 8:31 ` Américo Wang
2010-02-15 10:11 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-15 7:03 ` [PATCH 1/4] sysfs: Remove sysfs_get/put_active_two Américo Wang
2010-02-11 23:18 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-11 23:17 ` [PATCH 0/4] Better sysfs lockdep Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-11 23:43 ` Greg KH
2010-02-10 23:54 ` [PATCH] sysfs: differentiate between locking links and non-links Tejun Heo
2010-02-11 0:38 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-10 17:36 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-10 17:55 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2010-02-10 23:06 ` Greg KH
2010-02-11 21:42 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-11 22:32 ` Greg KH
2010-02-11 22:47 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-17 22:38 ` Greg KH
2010-02-18 0:39 ` Neil Brown
2010-02-18 1:01 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-18 1:12 ` Greg KH
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=4B728CFE.40208@kernel.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=gregkh@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=xiyou.wangcong@gmail.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