[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080520222702.GJ26609@mail.oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 15:27:02 -0700
From: Joel Becker <Joel.Becker@...cle.com>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Cc: Louis Rilling <Louis.Rilling@...labs.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ocfs2-devel@....oracle.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] configfs: Make nested default groups
lockdep-friendly
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 03:13:41PM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > Louis, what about sticking the recursion level on
> > configfs_dirent? That is, you could add sd->s_level and then use it
> > when needed. THis would hopefully avoid having to pass the level as
> > an argument to every function. Then we can go back to your original
> > scheme. If they recurse too much and hit the lockdep limit, just
> > rewind everything and return -ELOOP.
>
> you can also make a new lockdep key for each level... not pretty but it
> works
I think that's what we're talking about here. The toplevel is
I_MUTEX_PARENT, then each child has a class of (I_MUTEX_CHILD + depth),
where depth is the value of s_level. His original try passed depth
everywhere. I'm asking him to attach it to the configfs_dirent so that
the code stays readable. We run into a depth limit at
(MAX_LOCKDEP_SUBCLASS - I_MUTEX_PARENT - 1 == 5), which I think is
probably sane.
Do you mean something else? Perhaps not starting from
I_MUTEX_PARENT/CHILD and instead creating CONFIGFS_MUTEX_XXX?
Joel
--
"Copy from one, it's plagiarism; copy from two, it's research."
- Wilson Mizner
Joel Becker
Principal Software Developer
Oracle
E-mail: joel.becker@...cle.com
Phone: (650) 506-8127
--
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