lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Dec]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 0/4] lockdep/crossrelease: Apply crossrelease to page locks
From
Date
On 12/5/2017 2:30 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 02:16:19PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
>> For now, wait_for_completion() / complete() works with lockdep, add
>> lock_page() / unlock_page() and its family to lockdep support.
>>
>> Changes from v1
>> - Move lockdep_map_cross outside of page_ext to make it flexible
>> - Prevent allocating lockdep_map per page by default
>> - Add a boot parameter allowing the allocation for debugging
>>
>> Byungchul Park (4):
>> lockdep: Apply crossrelease to PG_locked locks
>> lockdep: Apply lock_acquire(release) on __Set(__Clear)PageLocked
>> lockdep: Move data of CONFIG_LOCKDEP_PAGELOCK from page to page_ext
>> lockdep: Add a boot parameter enabling to track page locks using
>> lockdep and disable it by default
>
> I don't like the way you've structured this patch series; first adding
> the lockdep map to struct page, then moving it to page_ext.

Hello,

I will make them into one patch.

> I also don't like it that you've made CONFIG_LOCKDEP_PAGELOCK not
> individually selectable. I might well want a kernel with crosslock
> support, but only for completions.

OK then, I will make it individually selectable.

I want to know others' opinions as well.

Thank you for the opinions. I will apply yours next spin.

--
Thanks,
Byungchul

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-12-05 06:47    [W:0.052 / U:1.408 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site