On 9/11/24 6:41 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Thu, Sep 05, 2024 at 01:47:06PM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
This patch series suppresses a lockdep complaint about recursive locking
that is triggered by switching USB roles. Please consider this patch series
for the next merge window.
I already took this commit into my tree for -rc1:
https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240822223717.253433-1-amitsd@xxxxxxxxxx
It's almost identical to yours, but you are messing with mutex states
here, why?
What does "messing with mutex states" mean in this context? My patch 3/3
does not modify the mutex lock class key at runtime. Instead, it
sets the mutex lock class key when the mutex is initialized. I think
this is a cleaner approach than modifying the lock class key at runtime.
I'll be glad to take a series on top of that one if you can
describe why this one is "more correct" that that one.
I will rebase my patch series on top of your for-next branch. I think
there is agreement that the approach of patch 3/3 in this series is
slightly better than the approach of the patch that has already been
queued.
Thanks,
Bart.
