[PATCH 0/1] lockdep: Kill held_lock->check and "int check" arg of__lock_acquire()

[Oleg Nesterov]

On 01/12, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > But what I really can't understans is what "check == 0" means? It
> > > seems that in fact it can be 1 or 2? Or, iow, "check == 0" is
> > > actually equivalent to "check == 1" ?
> >
> > Hmm indeed, the comment in lockdep.h says 0 means no checks at all,
> > but the code doesn't actually appear to work like that. I'm not sure
> > it ever did or not, I'd have to go dig through history.
> >
> > That said, given the current state it certainly looks like we can
> > remove the check argument.
> >
> > Ingo?
>
> Agreed.

OK, could you and Peter review the patch?

If it passes the review I'll send another one which changes the callers
of lock_acquire(). And trace_lock_acquire() should be trivially updated
too.

But could someone please explain me what should lockdep_no_validate
actually do? 1704f47b5 "lockdep: Add novalidate class for dev->mutex
conversion" doesn't tell which kind of warnings it tries to avoid,
and it looks buggy (see another email from me).

Oleg.

--
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/