Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH 7/7] lockdep: spin_lock_nest_lock() | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Date | Mon, 04 Aug 2008 16:32:12 +0200 |
| |
On Mon, 2008-08-04 at 07:26 -0700, Roland Dreier wrote: > > No more than 48 locks (mutexes, rwlocks, spinlock, RCU, everything > > covered by lockdep) held by any one code-path; including nested > > interrupt contexts. > > Does that mean that something like the new mm_take_all_locks() operation > is going to explode if someone tries to use it with lockdep on?
Gah - yes, clearly nobody tried this.. :-/
Just looking at the code it will not only run into this limit, but it would warn about recursion on the second file/anon vma due to utter lack of annotation.
Why are people still developing without lockdep?
/me sad
| |