Re: [PATCH 2/2] [RESEND] console: implement lockdep support for console_lock

[Daniel Vetter]

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-09-24 at 14:17 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Tue, 2012-09-18 at 01:03 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> > - In the printk code there's a special trylock, only used to kick off
>> >   the logbuffer printk'ing in console_unlock. But all that happens
>> >   while lockdep is disable (since printk does a few other evil
>> >   tricks). So no issue there, either.
>>
>> Not particularly evil, just plain broken.
>>
>> See this series:
>>
>>   http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=132446644123326&w=2
>>
>> In particular see patches 1-4. The problem with lockdep is that lockdep
>> uses printk and printk's recursion stuff is utterly broken.
>>
>> Console drivers being on crack simply doesn't help :-) Note that I would
>> never recommend drm/ksm to anybody who really cares about their console
>> output.

I've read through the patches and I'm hoping you don't volunteer me to
pick these up ... ;-) But there doesn't seem to be anything that would
get worse through this lockdep annotation patch, right?

> Also, don't cross-post with a subscribe only list.

Sorry, forgot about this, I'll try to fix this - we really need an
intel-gfx that's open to people not subscribed to it.

Thanks, Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/