[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YQe97lDFTmxnR5/b@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2021 11:42:06 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Desmond Cheong Zhi Xi <desmondcheongzx@...il.com>,
maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com, mripard@...nel.org,
tzimmermann@...e.de, airlied@...ux.ie, mingo@...hat.com,
will@...nel.org, longman@...hat.com, boqun.feng@...il.com,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
skhan@...uxfoundation.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] locking/lockdep, drm: apply new lockdep assert in
drm_auth.c
On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 10:26:16AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 31, 2021 at 04:24:56PM +0800, Desmond Cheong Zhi Xi wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Following a discussion on the patch ("drm: use the lookup lock in
> > drm_is_current_master") [1], Peter Zijlstra proposed new lockdep_assert
> > helpers to make it convenient to compose lockdep checks together.
> >
> > This series includes the patch that introduces the new lockdep helpers,
> > then utilizes these helpers in drm_is_current_master_locked in the
> > following patch.
> >
> > v1 -> v2:
> > Patch 2:
> > - Updated the kerneldoc on the lock design of drm_file.master to explain
> > the use of lockdep_assert(). As suggested by Boqun Feng.
> >
> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210722092929.244629-2-desmondcheongzx@gmail.com/ [1]
>
> Can you pls also cc: this to intel-gfx so the local CI there can pick it
> up and verify? Just to check we got it all.
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
Feel free to take it through the drm tree.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists