[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130503000358.GX19814@mtj.dyndns.org>
Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 17:03:58 -0700
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Colin Cross <ccross@...roid.com>
Cc: linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, arve@...roid.com,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/10] freezer: add new freezable helpers using
freezer_do_not_count()
On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 04:55:05PM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
> So, the freezable interface can't be something that people can use
> casually. It is something which should be carefully and strategically
> deployed where we *know* that lock dependency risks don't exist or at
> least are acceptable. I'm a bit weary that this patch is expanding
> the interface a lot that they now look like the equivalents of normal
> schedule calls. Not exactly sure what to do here but can we please at
> least have RED BOLD BLINKING comments which scream to people not to
> use these unless they know what they're doing?
Maybe we should trigger WARN_ON_ONCE() if lockdep_depth() > 0 by
default and have ugly variants which can be used if the caller is sure
that it's okay possibly with list of locks which are held?
--
tejun
--
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