Re: [PATCH 0/5] lockdep: (Was: check && lockdep_no_validate)

[Alan Stern]

On Mon, 20 Jan 2014, Oleg Nesterov wrote:

> > > At first glance, can't __ATTR_IGNORE_LOCKDEP() use no_validate too ?
> > > (ignoring the fact checkpatch.pl won't be happy). This can simplify
> > > the code, it seems.
> >
> > Well, the macro itself doesn't specify the lockdep class.  That happens
> > implicitly in sysfs_get_active(), in the call to rwsem_acquire_read().
> > However, it ought to be possible to change the code so that when
> > ignore_lockdep(sd) returns nonzero, we end up using no_validate.
> 
> sysfs_dirent_init_lockdep() can check ->ignore_lockdep and do
> lockdep_set_novalidate_class(). This way sysfs_ignore_lockdep() can
> go away.
> 
> I guess we could even change __ATTR_IGNORE_LOCKDEP() to initialize
> ->key = __lockdep_no_validate__ and kill ->ignore_lockdep.

It's clear that you have a more thorough understanding of how sysfs and
lockdep work than I do.  :-)

This suggestion sounds quite reasonable.

Alan Stern

--
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/