Re: [PATCH 1/3] lockdep: Apply crossrelease to PG_locked locks

2017-11-24 Thread Jan Kara
On Fri 24-11-17 09:11:49, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Fri 24-11-17 12:02:36, Byungchul Park wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 02:07:46PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > On Thu 16-11-17 21:48:05, Byungchul Park wrote: > > > > On 11/16/2017 9:02 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > > for each struct page.

Re: [PATCH 1/3] lockdep: Apply crossrelease to PG_locked locks

2017-11-24 Thread Michal Hocko
On Fri 24-11-17 12:02:36, Byungchul Park wrote: > On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 02:07:46PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Thu 16-11-17 21:48:05, Byungchul Park wrote: > > > On 11/16/2017 9:02 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > for each struct page. So you are doubling the size. Who is going to > > > > en

Re: [PATCH 1/3] lockdep: Apply crossrelease to PG_locked locks

2017-11-23 Thread Byungchul Park
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 02:07:46PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Thu 16-11-17 21:48:05, Byungchul Park wrote: > > On 11/16/2017 9:02 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > for each struct page. So you are doubling the size. Who is going to > > > enable this config option? You are moving this to page_ext i

Re: [PATCH 1/3] lockdep: Apply crossrelease to PG_locked locks

2017-11-16 Thread Michal Hocko
On Thu 16-11-17 21:48:05, Byungchul Park wrote: > On 11/16/2017 9:02 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > > for each struct page. So you are doubling the size. Who is going to > > enable this config option? You are moving this to page_ext in a later > > patch which is a good step but it doesn't go far enough

Re: [PATCH 1/3] lockdep: Apply crossrelease to PG_locked locks

2017-11-16 Thread Byungchul Park
On 11/16/2017 9:02 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: for each struct page. So you are doubling the size. Who is going to enable this config option? You are moving this to page_ext in a later patch which is a good step but it doesn't go far enough because this still consumes those resources. Is there any pr

Re: [PATCH 1/3] lockdep: Apply crossrelease to PG_locked locks

2017-11-16 Thread Michal Hocko
[I have only briefly looked at patches so I might have missed some details.] On Thu 16-11-17 12:14:25, Byungchul Park wrote: > Although lock_page() and its family can cause deadlock, lockdep have not > worked with them, because unlock_page() might be called in a different > context from the acquir

[PATCH 1/3] lockdep: Apply crossrelease to PG_locked locks

2017-11-15 Thread Byungchul Park
Although lock_page() and its family can cause deadlock, lockdep have not worked with them, because unlock_page() might be called in a different context from the acquire context, which violated lockdep's assumption. Now CONFIG_LOCKDEP_CROSSRELEASE has been introduced, lockdep can work with page loc