[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAEXW_YSM2wwah2Q7LKmUO1Dp7GG62ciQA1nZ7GLw3m6cyuXXTw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2019 08:24:35 -0400
From: Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@...x.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>, Neil Brown <neilb@...e.com>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com>, Peter Zilstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>, rcu <rcu@...r.kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/6] ipv4: add lockdep condition to fix for_each_entry
On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 8:20 AM Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 3:00 AM Pavel Machek <pavel@...x.de> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat 2019-06-01 18:27:34, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote:
> > > Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@...lfernandes.org>
> >
> > This really needs to be merged to previous patch, you can't break
> > compilation in middle of series...
> >
> > Or probably you need hlist_for_each_entry_rcu_lockdep() macro with
> > additional argument, and switch users to it.
>
> Good point. I can also just add a temporary transition macro, and then
> remove it in the last patch. That way no new macro is needed.
Actually, no. There is no compilation break so I did not follow what
you mean. The fourth argument to the hlist_for_each_entry_rcu is
optional. The only thing that happens is new lockdep warnings will
arise which later parts of the series fix by passing in that fourth
argument.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
