All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
To: Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com>
Cc: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, balbi@ti.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Tero Kristo <t-kristo@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] ARM: omap2+: omap_hwmod: Fix false lockdep warning
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 14:16:35 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150209221634.GD2531@atomide.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1502091835380.3767@utopia.booyaka.com>

* Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com> [150209 10:59]:
> On Mon, 9 Feb 2015, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> 
> > * Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com> [150209 08:04]:
> > > On Mon, 9 Feb 2015, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On 02/06/2015 09:26 PM, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> > > > >> Yeah, I've never really bothered with data too much, its a debug
> > > > >> feature. So lock_class_key is 8 bytes, and strictly speaking you could
> > > > >> union them over other fields, all we really need is unique addresses, we
> > > > >> don't actually use the storage.
> > > > > 
> > > > > True. our omap2plus defconfig does not have LOCKDEP enabled so it should not
> > > > > add anything to the data when running default kernel.
> > > > > I'll test the lockdep_set_class() method you suggested on Monday (not
> > > > > tomorrow), but still as first thing.
> > > > > If it is working as expected I'll send a patch with you as author.
> > > > 
> > > > With omap2plus_defconfig my build produces (vmlinux size):
> > > > Base: 				99905522
> > > > with my series:			99908385 (base + 2863)
> > > > with Peter Zijlstra's patch:	99910625 (base + 5103)
> > > > 
> > > > The reason for this is that we will only have
> > > > struct lock_class_key { };
> > > > in case of !CONFIG_LOCKDEP. On ARM however CONFIG_LOCKDEP is enabled by
> > > > default, while the CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCKDEP is disabled.
> > > > 
> > > > So it does add more data to our default omap2plus config.
> > > > 
> > > > Tony: do you have preference on the way we fix this issue?
> > > > 
> > > > As I recall there is a plan to remove the hwmod static database and move it or
> > > > generate it from DT? Not sure when and how this will be done, but will it
> > > > affect the lockdep_set_class() way?
> > > 
> > > Well I guess we could see what Tony says, but you do realize that the 
> > > difference in sizes that you posted above is about .003% of the total 
> > > binary size, right?  
> > > 
> > > If there's one thing we can say about the last few years of ARM kernel 
> > > development, it's that those kind of size increases are utterly dwarfed by 
> > > other changes in the kernel.  So I'd say, post a patch based on PeterZ's 
> > > fix and be done with it...
> > 
> > Well the thing to consider here is what Peter U is saying about
> > having struct omap_hwmod allocated based on the data from .dts
> > files. If the fix makes the dynamic allocation harder to do later on,
> > we should probably avoid it. If it's relatively easy to do later on,
> > then I don't have a problem with it.
> 
> The future destination for that code that makes the most sense to me is 
> for it to become integrated with the OMAP Sonics & Arteris bus drivers and 
> DT data.  So I wouldn't worry too much about it; I don't think the 
> lockdep fix will affect that at all.

OK up to you guys then.

Regards,

Tony

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
To: Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com>
Cc: Tero Kristo <t-kristo@ti.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, balbi@ti.com, mingo@redhat.com,
	linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] ARM: omap2+: omap_hwmod: Fix false lockdep warning
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 14:16:35 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150209221634.GD2531@atomide.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1502091835380.3767@utopia.booyaka.com>

* Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com> [150209 10:59]:
> On Mon, 9 Feb 2015, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> 
> > * Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com> [150209 08:04]:
> > > On Mon, 9 Feb 2015, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On 02/06/2015 09:26 PM, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> > > > >> Yeah, I've never really bothered with data too much, its a debug
> > > > >> feature. So lock_class_key is 8 bytes, and strictly speaking you could
> > > > >> union them over other fields, all we really need is unique addresses, we
> > > > >> don't actually use the storage.
> > > > > 
> > > > > True. our omap2plus defconfig does not have LOCKDEP enabled so it should not
> > > > > add anything to the data when running default kernel.
> > > > > I'll test the lockdep_set_class() method you suggested on Monday (not
> > > > > tomorrow), but still as first thing.
> > > > > If it is working as expected I'll send a patch with you as author.
> > > > 
> > > > With omap2plus_defconfig my build produces (vmlinux size):
> > > > Base: 				99905522
> > > > with my series:			99908385 (base + 2863)
> > > > with Peter Zijlstra's patch:	99910625 (base + 5103)
> > > > 
> > > > The reason for this is that we will only have
> > > > struct lock_class_key { };
> > > > in case of !CONFIG_LOCKDEP. On ARM however CONFIG_LOCKDEP is enabled by
> > > > default, while the CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCKDEP is disabled.
> > > > 
> > > > So it does add more data to our default omap2plus config.
> > > > 
> > > > Tony: do you have preference on the way we fix this issue?
> > > > 
> > > > As I recall there is a plan to remove the hwmod static database and move it or
> > > > generate it from DT? Not sure when and how this will be done, but will it
> > > > affect the lockdep_set_class() way?
> > > 
> > > Well I guess we could see what Tony says, but you do realize that the 
> > > difference in sizes that you posted above is about .003% of the total 
> > > binary size, right?  
> > > 
> > > If there's one thing we can say about the last few years of ARM kernel 
> > > development, it's that those kind of size increases are utterly dwarfed by 
> > > other changes in the kernel.  So I'd say, post a patch based on PeterZ's 
> > > fix and be done with it...
> > 
> > Well the thing to consider here is what Peter U is saying about
> > having struct omap_hwmod allocated based on the data from .dts
> > files. If the fix makes the dynamic allocation harder to do later on,
> > we should probably avoid it. If it's relatively easy to do later on,
> > then I don't have a problem with it.
> 
> The future destination for that code that makes the most sense to me is 
> for it to become integrated with the OMAP Sonics & Arteris bus drivers and 
> DT data.  So I wouldn't worry too much about it; I don't think the 
> lockdep fix will affect that at all.

OK up to you guys then.

Regards,

Tony

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: tony@atomide.com (Tony Lindgren)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 0/2] ARM: omap2+: omap_hwmod: Fix false lockdep warning
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 14:16:35 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150209221634.GD2531@atomide.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1502091835380.3767@utopia.booyaka.com>

* Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com> [150209 10:59]:
> On Mon, 9 Feb 2015, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> 
> > * Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com> [150209 08:04]:
> > > On Mon, 9 Feb 2015, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On 02/06/2015 09:26 PM, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> > > > >> Yeah, I've never really bothered with data too much, its a debug
> > > > >> feature. So lock_class_key is 8 bytes, and strictly speaking you could
> > > > >> union them over other fields, all we really need is unique addresses, we
> > > > >> don't actually use the storage.
> > > > > 
> > > > > True. our omap2plus defconfig does not have LOCKDEP enabled so it should not
> > > > > add anything to the data when running default kernel.
> > > > > I'll test the lockdep_set_class() method you suggested on Monday (not
> > > > > tomorrow), but still as first thing.
> > > > > If it is working as expected I'll send a patch with you as author.
> > > > 
> > > > With omap2plus_defconfig my build produces (vmlinux size):
> > > > Base: 				99905522
> > > > with my series:			99908385 (base + 2863)
> > > > with Peter Zijlstra's patch:	99910625 (base + 5103)
> > > > 
> > > > The reason for this is that we will only have
> > > > struct lock_class_key { };
> > > > in case of !CONFIG_LOCKDEP. On ARM however CONFIG_LOCKDEP is enabled by
> > > > default, while the CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCKDEP is disabled.
> > > > 
> > > > So it does add more data to our default omap2plus config.
> > > > 
> > > > Tony: do you have preference on the way we fix this issue?
> > > > 
> > > > As I recall there is a plan to remove the hwmod static database and move it or
> > > > generate it from DT? Not sure when and how this will be done, but will it
> > > > affect the lockdep_set_class() way?
> > > 
> > > Well I guess we could see what Tony says, but you do realize that the 
> > > difference in sizes that you posted above is about .003% of the total 
> > > binary size, right?  
> > > 
> > > If there's one thing we can say about the last few years of ARM kernel 
> > > development, it's that those kind of size increases are utterly dwarfed by 
> > > other changes in the kernel.  So I'd say, post a patch based on PeterZ's 
> > > fix and be done with it...
> > 
> > Well the thing to consider here is what Peter U is saying about
> > having struct omap_hwmod allocated based on the data from .dts
> > files. If the fix makes the dynamic allocation harder to do later on,
> > we should probably avoid it. If it's relatively easy to do later on,
> > then I don't have a problem with it.
> 
> The future destination for that code that makes the most sense to me is 
> for it to become integrated with the OMAP Sonics & Arteris bus drivers and 
> DT data.  So I wouldn't worry too much about it; I don't think the 
> lockdep fix will affect that at all.

OK up to you guys then.

Regards,

Tony

  reply	other threads:[~2015-02-09 22:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-02-06 12:48 [PATCH 0/2] ARM: omap2+: omap_hwmod: Fix false lockdep warning Peter Ujfalusi
2015-02-06 12:48 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2015-02-06 12:48 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2015-02-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 1/2] ARM: omap2+: omap_hwmod: Use _nested version of spinlock for oh->_lock Peter Ujfalusi
2015-02-06 12:48   ` Peter Ujfalusi
2015-02-06 12:48   ` Peter Ujfalusi
2015-02-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 2/2] ARM: DRA7: hwmod_data: Change locked_class for atl hwmod Peter Ujfalusi
2015-02-06 12:48   ` Peter Ujfalusi
2015-02-06 12:48   ` Peter Ujfalusi
2015-02-06 14:13 ` [PATCH 0/2] ARM: omap2+: omap_hwmod: Fix false lockdep warning Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-06 14:13   ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-06 16:05   ` Peter Ujfalusi
2015-02-06 16:05     ` Peter Ujfalusi
2015-02-06 16:05     ` Peter Ujfalusi
2015-02-06 18:32     ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-06 18:32       ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-06 19:26       ` Peter Ujfalusi
2015-02-06 19:26         ` Peter Ujfalusi
2015-02-06 19:26         ` Peter Ujfalusi
2015-02-09  8:27         ` Peter Ujfalusi
2015-02-09  8:27           ` Peter Ujfalusi
2015-02-09  8:27           ` Peter Ujfalusi
2015-02-09  9:23           ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-09  9:23             ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-09 16:00           ` Paul Walmsley
2015-02-09 16:00             ` Paul Walmsley
2015-02-09 17:31             ` Tony Lindgren
2015-02-09 17:31               ` Tony Lindgren
2015-02-09 18:55               ` Paul Walmsley
2015-02-09 18:55                 ` Paul Walmsley
2015-02-09 22:16                 ` Tony Lindgren [this message]
2015-02-09 22:16                   ` Tony Lindgren
2015-02-09 22:16                   ` Tony Lindgren

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=20150209221634.GD2531@atomide.com \
    --to=tony@atomide.com \
    --cc=balbi@ti.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=paul@pwsan.com \
    --cc=peter.ujfalusi@ti.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=t-kristo@ti.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 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.