From: Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@mellanox.com>
Cc: Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>,
RDMA mailing list <linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@mellanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH rdma-rc] RDMA/mlx5: Release locks during notifier unregister
Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2019 12:50:37 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <760cfc7eb23c6dc170856a3a60226f32f8c8bf9f.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190801164330.GH23885@mellanox.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1003 bytes --]
On Thu, 2019-08-01 at 16:43 +0000, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 12:40:43PM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote:
>
> > > It does have a lock though, the caller holds it, hence the request
> > > for
> > > the lockdep.
> >
> > You're right, although I think the lockdep annotation can be a
> > separate
> > patch as it's neeeded on more than just the function this patch
> > touches.
>
> Why? This relies on that lock, so it should have the
> lockdep_assert_held assert.
It does, but this patch is about the scheduling while atomic, adding a
lockdep assertion fix is doubling up on fixes in the patch. A separate
patch that addes the lockdep assert to both the bind and unbind calls
makes more sense and just feels cleaner to me.
> If there are more functions with implicit locking theyt they can be
> fixed separately...
--
Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>
GPG KeyID: B826A3330E572FDD
Fingerprint = AE6B 1BDA 122B 23B4 265B 1274 B826 A333 0E57 2FDD
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-01 16:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-07-31 8:38 [PATCH rdma-rc] RDMA/mlx5: Release locks during notifier unregister Leon Romanovsky
2019-07-31 16:22 ` Doug Ledford
2019-07-31 17:00 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-07-31 17:09 ` Leon Romanovsky
2019-07-31 17:22 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-07-31 18:01 ` Leon Romanovsky
2019-07-31 18:51 ` Doug Ledford
2019-08-01 8:22 ` Leon Romanovsky
2019-07-31 19:55 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-08-01 8:27 ` Leon Romanovsky
2019-08-01 12:00 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-08-01 12:08 ` Leon Romanovsky
2019-08-01 14:16 ` Doug Ledford
2019-08-01 15:59 ` Leon Romanovsky
2019-08-01 16:11 ` Doug Ledford
2019-08-01 16:20 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-08-01 16:40 ` Doug Ledford
2019-08-01 16:43 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-08-01 16:50 ` Doug Ledford [this message]
2019-08-01 17:31 ` Leon Romanovsky
2019-08-01 16:23 ` Leon Romanovsky
2019-08-01 16:42 ` Doug Ledford
2019-08-01 17:33 ` Leon Romanovsky
2019-08-01 20:09 ` Doug Ledford
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=760cfc7eb23c6dc170856a3a60226f32f8c8bf9f.camel@redhat.com \
--to=dledford@redhat.com \
--cc=jgg@mellanox.com \
--cc=leon@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=saeedm@mellanox.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.