2006-10-06 09:44:46

by Aneesh Kumar K.V

[permalink] [raw]

Subject: [PATCH] lockdep-design.txt

---

Hi Ingo,

I was looking at lockdep-desing.txt and i guess i am confused with the
changes with respect to fd7bcea35e7efb108c34ee2b3840942a3749cadb. It
says

+ '.' acquired while irqs enabled
+ '+' acquired in irq context
+ '-' acquired in process context with irqs disabled
+ '?' read-acquired both with irqs enabled and in irq context
+


But the get_usage_chars() function does this for '-'
if (class->usage_mask & LOCKF_ENABLED_HARDIRQS)
*c1 = '-';



So i guess what would be correct would be
'.' acquired while irqs disabled
'+' acquired in irq context
'-' acquired with irqs enabled
'?' read acquired in irq context with irqs enabled.

Is this correct ?

-aneesh

---

Attachments:

(No filename) (708.00 B)
lockdep-design.txt.diff (710.00 B)
Download all attachments

2006-10-09 07:00:32

by Ingo Molnar

[permalink] [raw]

Subject: Re: [PATCH] lockdep-design.txt

---

* Aneesh Kumar <[email protected]> wrote:

> I was looking at lockdep-desing.txt and i guess i am confused with the
> changes with respect to fd7bcea35e7efb108c34ee2b3840942a3749cadb. It
> says
>
> + '.' acquired while irqs enabled
> + '+' acquired in irq context
> + '-' acquired in process context with irqs disabled
> + '?' read-acquired both with irqs enabled and in irq context
> +
>
>
> But the get_usage_chars() function does this for '-'
> if (class->usage_mask & LOCKF_ENABLED_HARDIRQS)
> *c1 = '-';
>
>
>
> So i guess what would be correct would be
> '.' acquired while irqs disabled
> '+' acquired in irq context
> '-' acquired with irqs enabled
> '?' read acquired in irq context with irqs enabled.
>
> Is this correct ?

indeed, that's correct.

Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>

Ingo