[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1218796084.10800.239.camel@twins>
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 12:28:04 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/07] dyn_array/nr_irqs/sparse_irq support v10 - fix
On Fri, 2008-08-15 at 12:19 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2008-08-15 at 11:35 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > > looks wrong - it should be unconditional (i've done that via the patch
> > > below). I dont remember why we made early_init_irq_lock_class()
> > > dependent on CONFIG_TRACE_IRQFLAGS before. Peter, do you have any
> > > memories?
> >
> > Nope, git suggests I poke you about it.. :-)
>
> muhaha - i dont even know that guy who did this sloppy commit 2 years
> ago - "Ingo Molnar", or however he is called.
>
> I believe my (mistaken) thinking would have been that desc->irq lockdep
> class does not matter as long as we dont do irq-tracing. Which might
> have been borderline correct then but is wrong now, for things like
> lockstat?
/me pokes a bit at kconfig dependancies, and yes, it seems you're right
- lockstat doesn't require irq tracing..
--
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