[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170905081603.nfo5lg3cb6klrfw7@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2017 10:16:03 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: �ں�ö/���ӿ�����/SW Platform(��)AOT��(byungchul.park@....com)
<byungchul.park@....com>
Cc: "tj@...nel.org" <tj@...nel.org>,
"johannes.berg@...el.com" <johannes.berg@...el.com>,
"mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"oleg@...hat.com" <oleg@...hat.com>,
"david@...morbit.com" <david@...morbit.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"kernel-team@....com" <kernel-team@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] lockdep: Remove unnecessary acquisitions wrt
workqueue flush
On Tue, Sep 05, 2017 at 04:36:18PM +0900, �ں�ö/���ӿ�����/SW Platform(��)AOT��(byungchul.park@....com) wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Peter Zijlstra [mailto:peterz@...radead.org]
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2017 4:26 PM
> > To: Byungchul Park
> > Cc: tj@...nel.org; johannes.berg@...el.com; mingo@...nel.org;
> > tglx@...utronix.de; oleg@...hat.com; david@...morbit.com; linux-
> > kernel@...r.kernel.org; kernel-team@....com
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] lockdep: Remove unnecessary acquisitions wrt
> > workqueue flush
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 05, 2017 at 11:29:14AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> >
> > > Also, lock_map_acquire() in process_one_work() is too strong for that
> > > purpose. lock_map_acquire_might() is enough. Replaced it.
> >
> > NAK!! traditional annotations are superior to cross-release. They are not
> > timing dependent.
>
> You seem to mis-understand this. This also make them timing independent.
> I also agree that we need timing independent report in workqueue code.
> That's actually why I propose this patch.
Then clearly it needs comments and changelog to explain how it does
things.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists