From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH] lockdep: fix sk->sk_callback_lock locking Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 12:06:07 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <20061129.120607.21923563.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1164800544.6588.118.camel@twins> <20061129120709.GB22749@gondor.apana.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org, mingo@elte.hu, gandalf@wlug.westbo.se Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:15260 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S936084AbWK2UGF (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Nov 2006 15:06:05 -0500 To: herbert@gondor.apana.org.au In-Reply-To: <20061129120709.GB22749@gondor.apana.org.au> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org From: Herbert Xu Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 23:07:09 +1100 > On Wed, Nov 29, 2006 at 12:42:24PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > However I'm not quite sure yet how to teach lockdep about this. The > > proposed patch will shut it up though. > > As a rule I think we should never make semantic changes to shut up > lockdep. Especially ones which are costly, as this proposed change is in that it disables software interrupts in a place where that is completely unnecessary. Let's not even consider this patch :)