On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 08:53:35AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 07:44:51AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > The Subject prefix for this should be "block:". > > > > > @@ -945,7 +945,7 @@ int submit_bio_wait(struct bio *bio) > > > { > > > struct submit_bio_ret ret; > > > > > > - init_completion(&ret.event); > > > + init_completion_with_map(&ret.event, &bio->bi_disk->lockdep_map); > > > > FYI, I have an outstanding patch to simplify this a lot, which > > switches this to DECLARE_COMPLETION_ONSTACK. I can delay this or let > > you pick it up with your series, but we'll need a variant of > > DECLARE_COMPLETION_ONSTACK with the lockdep annotations. > > Hello, > > I'm sorry for late. > > I think your patch makes block code simpler and better. I like it. > > But, I just wonder if it's related to my series. Because it shows that we also need a version of DECLARE_COMPLETION_ONSTACK the gets passed an explicit lockdep map. And because if it was merged through a different tree it would create a conflict. > Is it proper to add > your patch into my series? Sure.