lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Mar]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: BUG: MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAINS too low!
On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 9:41 PM Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 7:09 AM Taehee Yoo <ap420073@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Yes, I fully agree with this.
> > If we calculate the subclass for lock_nested() very well, I think we
> > might use static lockdep key for addr_list_lock_key too. I think
> > "dev->upper_level" and "dev->lower_level" might be used as subclass.
> > These values are updated recursively in master/nomaster operation.
>
> Great! I will think about this too. At least I will remove the other keys
> for net-next.

Hi Cong,

Was this done? This still harms testing of the whole kernel. Disabling
LOCKDEP does not look good either...

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-03-04 09:03    [W:0.069 / U:1.464 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site