From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 22:52:07 +0200 Message-ID: <20131016205207.GE10651@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <1381949500-501-1-git-send-email-treding@nvidia.com> <1381949500-501-2-git-send-email-treding@nvidia.com> <20131016200645.GD10651@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20131016201410.GA26785@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20131017073100.2cab1ffa@notabene.brown> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:37195 "EHLO merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1761501Ab3JPUwU (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Oct 2013 16:52:20 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20131017073100.2cab1ffa@notabene.brown> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: NeilBrown Cc: Thierry Reding , Shaohua Li , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hey Neil; it looks like its one of your patches isn't it? http://www.spinics.net/lists/raid/msg44100.html http://www.spinics.net/lists/raid/msg44101.html Given that I can't find them in a lkml archive means nobody's ever seen those patches. Anyway; has that 3/3 patch ever been ran with lockdep enabled? Stuff like: + for (i = 0; i < NR_STRIPE_HASH_LOCKS; i++) + spin_lock_init(conf->hash_locks + i); And: +static void __lock_all_hash_locks(struct r5conf *conf) +{ + int i; + for (i = 0; i < NR_STRIPE_HASH_LOCKS; i++) + spin_lock(conf->hash_locks + i); +} Tends to complain real loud. This leaves one to wonder... 'fancy' locking scheme:1, validation effort:0