From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1759996AbcINBBS (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Tue, 13 Sep 2016 21:01:18 -0400
Received: from mail-yw0-f171.google.com ([209.85.161.171]:33017 "EHLO
        mail-yw0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1759490AbcINBBQ (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 13 Sep 2016 21:01:16 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20160913214244.GB5020@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1473759914-17003-1-git-send-email-byungchul.park@lge.com>
 <1473759914-17003-8-git-send-email-byungchul.park@lge.com>
 <20160913150554.GI2794@worktop> <CANrsvRNarrDejL_ju-X=MtiBbwG-u2H4TNsZ1i_d=3nbd326PQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160913193829.GA5016@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20160913214244.GB5020@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
From: Byungchul Park <max.byungchul.park@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 10:01:14 +0900
Message-ID: <CANrsvRM08k7auvhvC2EuEh_W_ydAN0rRFgMSN9fvW=cmVM6gJw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 07/15] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, tglx@linutronix.de,
        Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>, boqun.feng@gmail.com,
        kirill@shutemov.name,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-mm@kvack.org, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        npiggin@gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 6:42 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 09:38:29PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
>> > > I _think_ you propose to keep track of all prior held locks and then use
>> > > the union of the held list on the block-chain with the prior held list
>> > > from the complete context.
>> >
>> > Almost right. Only thing we need to do to consider the union is to
>> > connect two chains of two contexts by adding one dependency 'b -> a'.
>>
>> Sure, but how do you arrive at which connection to make. The document is
>> entirely silent on this crucial point.
>>
>> The union between the held-locks of the blocked and prev-held-locks of
>> the release should give a fair indication I think, but then, I've not
>> thought too hard on this yet.
>
> s/union/intersection/
>
> those that are in both sets.

Precisely speaking, I introduces separate chains.

For example,

1. Held-locks of the blocked,
A -> B -> C (which original lockdep builds)

2. Prev-held-locks of the release
G -> H -> I (which original lockdep builds, too)

3. Cross chain (which I introduced newly)
C -> G

Then the 'A -> B -> C -> G -> H -> I' can be traversed
when bfs is performed.

-- 
Thanks,
Byungchul