From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Byungchul Park <max.byungchul.park@gmail.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
david@fromorbit.com,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
oleg@redhat.com, kernel-team@lge.com, daniel@ffwll.ch
Subject: Re: About the try to remove cross-release feature entirely by Ingo
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 02:05:56 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180103070556.GA22583@thunk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f2bc220a-a363-122a-dbf9-e5416c550899@lge.com>
On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 11:10:37AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> > The point I was trying to drive home is that "all we have to do is
> > just classify everything well or just invalidate the right lock
>
> Just to be sure, we don't have to invalidate lock objects at all but
> a problematic waiter only.
So essentially you are proposing that we have to play "whack-a-mole"
as we find false positives, and where we may have to put in ad-hoc
plumbing to only invalidate "a problematic waiter" when it's
problematic --- or to entirely suppress the problematic waiter
altogether. And in that case, a file system developer might be forced
to invalidate a lock/"waiter"/"completion" in another subsystem.
I will also remind you that doing this will trigger a checkpatch.pl
*error*:
ERROR("LOCKDEP", "lockdep_no_validate class is reserved for device->mutex.\n" . $herecurr);
- Ted
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Byungchul Park <max.byungchul.park@gmail.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
david@fromorbit.com,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
oleg@redhat.com, kernel-team@lge.com, daniel@ffwll.ch
Subject: Re: About the try to remove cross-release feature entirely by Ingo
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 02:05:56 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180103070556.GA22583@thunk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f2bc220a-a363-122a-dbf9-e5416c550899@lge.com>
On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 11:10:37AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> > The point I was trying to drive home is that "all we have to do is
> > just classify everything well or just invalidate the right lock
>
> Just to be sure, we don't have to invalidate lock objects at all but
> a problematic waiter only.
So essentially you are proposing that we have to play "whack-a-mole"
as we find false positives, and where we may have to put in ad-hoc
plumbing to only invalidate "a problematic waiter" when it's
problematic --- or to entirely suppress the problematic waiter
altogether. And in that case, a file system developer might be forced
to invalidate a lock/"waiter"/"completion" in another subsystem.
I will also remind you that doing this will trigger a checkpatch.pl
*error*:
ERROR("LOCKDEP", "lockdep_no_validate class is reserved for device->mutex.\n" . $herecurr);
- Ted
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-03 7:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 82+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-12-13 6:24 About the try to remove cross-release feature entirely by Ingo Byungchul Park
2017-12-13 6:24 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-13 7:13 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-13 7:13 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-13 15:23 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-12-13 15:23 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-12-14 3:07 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-14 3:07 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-14 5:58 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-14 5:58 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-14 11:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-14 11:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-14 13:30 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-14 13:30 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-13 10:46 ` [PATCH] locking/lockdep: Remove the cross-release locking checks Ingo Molnar
2017-12-13 10:46 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-12-13 10:46 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-12-14 5:01 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-14 5:01 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-15 4:05 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-15 4:05 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-15 6:24 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-15 6:24 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-15 7:38 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-15 7:38 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-15 8:39 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-15 8:39 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-15 21:15 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-15 21:15 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-16 2:41 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-16 2:41 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-29 1:47 ` About the try to remove cross-release feature entirely by Ingo Byungchul Park
2017-12-29 1:47 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-29 2:02 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-29 2:02 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-29 3:51 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-29 3:51 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-29 7:28 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-29 7:28 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-30 6:16 ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-30 6:16 ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-30 15:40 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-30 15:40 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-30 20:44 ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-30 20:44 ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-30 22:40 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-30 22:40 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-30 23:00 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-30 23:00 ` Theodore Ts'o
2018-01-01 10:18 ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-01-01 10:18 ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-01-01 16:00 ` Theodore Ts'o
2018-01-01 16:00 ` Theodore Ts'o
2018-01-03 2:38 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03 2:38 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03 2:28 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03 2:28 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03 2:58 ` Dave Chinner
2018-01-03 2:58 ` Dave Chinner
2018-01-03 5:48 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03 5:48 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-05 16:49 ` J. Bruce Fields
2018-01-05 16:49 ` J. Bruce Fields
2018-01-05 17:05 ` J. Bruce Fields
2018-01-05 17:05 ` J. Bruce Fields
2018-01-03 2:10 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03 2:10 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03 7:05 ` Theodore Ts'o [this message]
2018-01-03 7:05 ` Theodore Ts'o
2018-01-03 8:10 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03 8:10 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03 8:23 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03 8:23 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03 8:23 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03 1:57 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03 1:57 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-02 7:57 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-02 7:57 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-29 8:09 ` Amir Goldstein
2017-12-29 8:09 ` Amir Goldstein
2017-12-29 9:46 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-29 9:46 ` Byungchul Park
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=20180103070556.GA22583@thunk.org \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=byungchul.park@lge.com \
--cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=kernel-team@lge.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=max.byungchul.park@gmail.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.