From: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@canonical.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Shuah Khan <shuahkhan@gmail.com>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@hp.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Scott J Norton <scott.norton@hp.com>,
Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2 v6] locking/selftest: Support queued rwlock
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2014 16:44:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53E0EDD2.50600@canonical.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140805144108.GK9918@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
op 05-08-14 16:41, Peter Zijlstra schreef:
> On Tue, Aug 05, 2014 at 08:07:28AM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 7:28 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Maybe I wasn't clear; but I meant you should extend the lock tests to
>>> cover the full qrwlock semantics.
>>>
>>> That means we also need tests like:
>>>
>>> RL(X1);
>>> IRQ_ENTER();
>>> RL(X2);
>>> IRQ_EXIT();
>>>
>>> To fully validate that in_interrupt exception to fairness etc..
>> A bit off topic for this patch, however relevant for tests in general.
>> Is there a reason why these locking selftests need to be under lib?
>> Can they be consolidated under tools/testing/selftests?
> tools/ seems wrong as its very much not userspace.
Could be moved to kernel/locking though now that all other locking moved there. :-)
~Maarten
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-08-05 14:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-29 18:53 [PATCH 0/2 v6] lockdep: add support for queued rwlock Waiman Long
2014-07-29 18:53 ` [PATCH 1/2 v6] locking/lockdep: Restrict the use of recursive read_lock() with qrwlock Waiman Long
2014-07-29 18:53 ` [PATCH 2/2 v6] locking/selftest: Support queued rwlock Waiman Long
2014-08-05 13:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-08-05 14:07 ` Shuah Khan
2014-08-05 14:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-08-05 14:44 ` Maarten Lankhorst [this message]
2014-08-05 14:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-08-05 15:05 ` Shuah Khan
2014-08-05 15:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-08-05 15:45 ` Shuah Khan
2014-08-06 17:24 ` Waiman Long
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=53E0EDD2.50600@canonical.com \
--to=maarten.lankhorst@canonical.com \
--cc=Waiman.Long@hp.com \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=scott.norton@hp.com \
--cc=shuahkhan@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