[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170302134103.GS6515@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 14:41:03 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, walken@...gle.com,
boqun.feng@...il.com, kirill@...temov.name,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
iamjoonsoo.kim@....com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
npiggin@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 06/13] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 10:17:32PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> diff --git a/lib/Kconfig.debug b/lib/Kconfig.debug
> index a6c8db1..7890661 100644
> --- a/lib/Kconfig.debug
> +++ b/lib/Kconfig.debug
> @@ -1042,6 +1042,19 @@ config DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC
> spin_lock_init()/mutex_init()/etc., or whether there is any lock
> held during task exit.
>
> +config LOCKDEP_CROSSRELEASE
> + bool "Lock debugging: make lockdep work for crosslocks"
> + select LOCKDEP
> + select TRACE_IRQFLAGS
> + default n
> + help
> + This makes lockdep work for crosslock which is a lock allowed to
> + be released in a different context from the acquisition context.
> + Normally a lock must be released in the context acquiring the lock.
> + However, relexing this constraint helps synchronization primitives
> + such as page locks or completions can use the lock correctness
> + detector, lockdep.
> +
> config PROVE_LOCKING
> bool "Lock debugging: prove locking correctness"
> depends on DEBUG_KERNEL && TRACE_IRQFLAGS_SUPPORT && STACKTRACE_SUPPORT && LOCKDEP_SUPPORT
Does CROSSRELEASE && !PROVE_LOCKING make any sense?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists