[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0611091354060.17915@dhcp83-20.boston.redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2006 13:58:29 -0500 (EST)
From: Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, arjan@...radead.org,
rdreier@...co.com
Subject: Re: locking hierarchy based on lockdep
On Thu, 9 Nov 2006, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> > You are right though, i think that the data in the locks after lists
> > is sufficient to re-create the entire graph, since its acyclic, but by
> > simply printing out nodes of distance '1', the algorithm is greatly
> > simplified. Otherwise, i'd have to first reconstruct the graph...
>
> but ... the locks_after list should really only include locks that are
> taken immediately after. I.e. there should only be 'distance 1' locks.
>
hmmm...that's not how i read the lockdep code...and the little piece of
code that i added to add a distance measurement to links, found mostly
distance 1 links but there were a number of 2 and 3 links as well (i don't
think i saw any greater than 3).
thanks.
-Jason
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists