On 12/5/2017 2:46 PM, Byungchul Park wrote:
On 12/5/2017 2:30 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 02:16:19PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
For now, wait_for_completion() / complete() works with lockdep, add
lock_page() / unlock_page() and its family to lockdep support.
Changes from v1
- Move lockdep_map_cross outside of page_ext to make it flexible
- Prevent allocating lockdep_map per page by default
- Add a boot parameter allowing the allocation for debugging
Byungchul Park (4):
lockdep: Apply crossrelease to PG_locked locks
lockdep: Apply lock_acquire(release) on __Set(__Clear)PageLocked
lockdep: Move data of CONFIG_LOCKDEP_PAGELOCK from page to page_ext
lockdep: Add a boot parameter enabling to track page locks using
lockdep and disable it by default
I don't like the way you've structured this patch series; first adding
the lockdep map to struct page, then moving it to page_ext.
Hello,
I will make them into one patch.
I've thought it more.
Actually I did it because I thought I'd better make it into two
patches since it makes reviewers easier to review. It doesn't matter
which one I choose, but I prefer to split it.
But, if you are strongly against it, then I will follow you.
--
Thanks,
Byungchul
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
