LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] lockdep: implement full check without irq checking
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 12:25:05 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1225365905.3690.30.camel@johannes.berg> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1225365316.7803.69.camel@twins>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1074 bytes --]
On Thu, 2008-10-30 at 12:15 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-10-30 at 11:36 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
>
> > > del_timer_sync():
> > >
> > > local_irq_save(flags);
> > > lock_aquire(my fake timer lock);
> > > lock_release(...);
> > > local_irq_restore(flags);
> > >
> > > and make that conditional CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING and or wrap it up
> > > somewhere..
> >
> > Yeah, that is possible, but it seemed to me that would affect the
> > performance of del_timer_sync() quite a bit. Not sure it matters. And on
> > powerpc (which I care about) it won't actually affect performance much
> > because we lazily disable IRQs, but still. The >= 2 change also seemed
> > to generate smaller code?
>
> Its debug code, and I the >= 2 change makes the code much less obvious.
>
> So I prefer the slightly less performant but conceptually cleaner IRQ
> disable variant.
Alright. Thomas, shout if you want this code at all, then I'll clean it
up and resend, I don't particularly care, just did it to see if it was
possible.
johannes
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-10-30 11:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-23 19:35 [PATCH 0/2] Timer sync lock checking Johannes Berg
2008-10-23 19:44 ` [PATCH 1/2] lockdep: implement full check without irq checking Johannes Berg
2008-10-29 15:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-10-30 10:36 ` Johannes Berg
2008-10-30 11:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-10-30 11:25 ` Johannes Berg [this message]
2008-10-23 19:46 ` [PATCH 2/2] timer: implement lockdep deadlock detection Johannes Berg
2008-10-23 20:37 ` [PATCH 3/2] tasklet: " Johannes Berg
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1225365905.3690.30.camel@johannes.berg \
--to=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--subject='Re: [PATCH 1/2] lockdep: implement full check without irq checking' \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).