[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87h6za602y.fsf@jogness.linutronix.de>
Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2022 20:29:01 +0106
From: John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>
To: paulmck@...nel.org
Cc: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Neeraj Upadhyay <quic_neeraju@...cinc.com>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>, rcu@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH printk v3 01/40] rcu: implement lockdep_rcu_enabled for
!CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC
On 2022-11-07, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org> wrote:
>> Provide an implementation for debug_lockdep_rcu_enabled() when
>> CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC is not enabled. This allows code to check
>> if rcu lockdep debugging is available without needing an extra
>> check if CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC is enabled.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>
>
> If you would like me to take this one, please let me know.
Yes, it would be great if you would carry this in the rcu tree. This
printk series is already relying on the rcu tree for the NMI-safe
work. Thanks!
John
Powered by blists - more mailing lists