From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51687C4332B for ; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 15:16:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2610720724 for ; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 15:16:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="rR8TitqV" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726955AbgCVPQ3 (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Mar 2020 11:16:29 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-f66.google.com ([209.85.167.66]:39644 "EHLO mail-lf1-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726583AbgCVPQ2 (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Mar 2020 11:16:28 -0400 Received: by mail-lf1-f66.google.com with SMTP id j15so8201901lfk.6 for ; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 08:16:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=UiQbUXjkv7dvJPYjix5G08GTr5tXFgyICC/8mG3TbLM=; b=rR8TitqVvdTSiG5IDnpTZycycf9Juv73G4Oq20wrsO8YxX6DngsUCy1LjlHZFtog/3 on1H0z4jKEsE7lu9SGJQBZNtm2p5U4MCd2jXKDFUfA4N7DG1Rg3+onS0YfLmPZrV6NFc D3rkIpEG5nDNe8TiUYZojIxcUN9l4MfSeTF2afJnAid9bRhFmKCsrJbI6GtajF2Y/t6j Moxs1vzKpPPSpvA5pH/J/OtZ+ps2dHwAx2Nq8oT1Lx6YXSzRjvYPEML/lxQWcIjwajSS +d+JlSGOzOYo1xvlFTSuMBKTp1rbRcZ9Ew9rRjFUhLXaXvHfQpcJBkRHF4fRhBhyKViP TzSg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=UiQbUXjkv7dvJPYjix5G08GTr5tXFgyICC/8mG3TbLM=; b=FBhq+R4kNuUR33P9Ilh0zwG//5jH9BflJ78apTHeOfGz1QTV16TddnhVNTliP5OWji CCFV1C1HWUs66xu0K0iyf3UKK2g4ELVe3SmZXquigi81/ZRNYREm7tvWE8oxLaLs5SN4 O6MGRyEZ3WGNL896/Vw1SvoUYq1I34QY8+nnGKbpbHVF52npjXz+NvIiExuy0a/C6WCk l+BIpbHjAp7tx2k8UmfNP4OSneanXftYtlyxkeLNAIifzKPo+1kaXbbWEOoUdIrUrTt5 uTK/7KvKG5QbfaKGyYIlDEc6fqABiP7PwfLkhiay8InDaOtOplnsP5QCYu5mHtGZuVG4 mSlA== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ0yDlGC1dhFZmGi4Wow/IXb9QDclLWIVSYgBYQI+Rx0cdlmQbSx jgutLmoScjH+PTFvYuHpzIbkQy8OVCsNsEoFtDQULA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vsCUq5yboISgFixyCY71nyL49myzuOxRv5IfB4yL45p/mq8M+oDVJbl73ER46yiPXZDDtpIUZVSaAp5CwjfWDc= X-Received: by 2002:a19:ac42:: with SMTP id r2mr10521930lfc.38.1584890184772; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 08:16:24 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1584065460-22205-1-git-send-email-jrdr.linux@gmail.com> <20200313122210.GB31668@ziepe.ca> In-Reply-To: <20200313122210.GB31668@ziepe.ca> From: Souptick Joarder Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2020 20:46:13 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/hmm.c : Remove additional check for lockdep_assert_held() To: Jason Gunthorpe Cc: =?UTF-8?B?SsOpcsO0bWUgR2xpc3Nl?= , Andrew Morton , Linux-MM , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 5:52 PM Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 07:41:00AM +0530, Souptick Joarder wrote: > > walk_page_range() already has a check for lockdep_assert_held(). > > So additional check for lockdep_assert_held() can be removed from > > hmm_range_fault(). > > Is there a reason why you think this redundancy is bad? Other than removing an extra check , I don't have any other strong reason to support this patch. > > IMHO it makes it easier to understand the API contract if key top > level APIs have their assumptions coded in lockdep. Ok, I will drop this patch. Sorry for the noise.