[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <86b5c0275e43d825b13a71ee2875e8ec48b56578.camel@linux.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2024 17:13:09 +0200
From: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@...ux.intel.com>
To: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Cc: intel-xe@...ts.freedesktop.org, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Waiman Long
<longman@...hat.com>, Maarten Lankhorst <maarten@...khorst.se>, Christian
König <christian.koenig@....com>,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] locking/ww_mutex: Adjust to lockdep nest_lock
requirements
On Wed, 2024-10-16 at 10:12 -0700, Boqun Feng wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 08:17:50AM +0200, Thomas Hellström wrote:
> [...]
> > >
> > > So even though first_lock_dep_map is a fake lock, it has to have
> > > the
> > > same wait types as a real mutex.
> >
> > Understood.
> > >
> > > Does this make sense?
> >
> > Yes it does. I'll update to a v3, and add a Tested-by: tag. Would
> > you
>
> I think you should send a v3 then after I test, I will send my
> Tested-by.
>
> > like a Co-developed-by: tag as well?
>
> It's not a big change onto yours, but feel free to add it.
It would probably have taken me considerable time to find that missing
LD_WAIT_SLEEP, but I forgot to ask for your S-O-B so I sent the patch
without. Perhaps can be added at commit time if needed.
Thanks again,
Thomas
>
> Regards,
> Boqun
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Thomas
> >
> >
> [...]
Powered by blists - more mailing lists