lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jan]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: About the try to remove cross-release feature entirely by Ingo
From
Date
On 12/31/2017 7:40 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 30, 2017 at 12:44:17PM -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>
>> I'm not sure I agree with this part. What if we add a new TCP lock class
>> for connections which are used for filesystems/network block devices/...?
>> Yes, it'll be up to each user to set the lockdep classification correctly,
>> but that's a relatively small number of places to add annotations,
>> and I don't see why it wouldn't work.
>
> I was exagerrating a bit for effect, I admit. (but only a bit).
>
> It can probably be for all TCP connections that are used by kernel
> code (as opposed to userspace-only TCP connections). But it would
> probably have to be each and every device-mapper instance, each and
> every block device, each and every mounted file system, each and every
> bdi object, etc.
>
> The point I was trying to drive home is that "all we have to do is
> just classify everything well or just invalidate the right lock

Just to be sure, we don't have to invalidate lock objects at all but
a problematic waiter only.

> objects" is a massive understatement of the complexity level of what
> would be required, or the number of locks/completion handlers that
> would have to be blacklisted.
>
> - Ted
>

--
Thanks,
Byungchul

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-01-03 03:11    [W:0.112 / U:4.936 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site