On Friday 20 November 2015 12:24:00 Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 01:12:00PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Friday 20 November 2015 11:41:27 Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > Can we please at least have a comment explaining that this is working
> > > around lockdep limitations?
>
> > Not sure which limitation you are referring to. Maybe you could just
> > modify the changelog text as you like when applying the patch?
>
> > I tried to capture the fact that mutex_lock_nested() intentionally
> > doesn't evaluate its second argument when CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC
> > is not set, but that appears to be less of a limitation than a
> > choice of the interface.
>
> That's the limitation (or intereface choice or whatever) that I'm
> talking about - the code looks like a function call so not evaulating
> the second argument is surprising. I'm looking for something in the
> code rather than the changelog so it doesn't get cleaned up later.
>
Got it. Will send a new version soon.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
