Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751866AbdI1Xvz (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Sep 2017 19:51:55 -0400 Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com ([173.37.86.80]:28172 "EHLO rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751219AbdI1Xvx (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Sep 2017 19:51:53 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0CoAQBRis1Z/4QNJK1dGQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBBwEBAQEBg1yBUi6dcIFUIpg9CoU7AoQlQxQBAgEBAQEBAQFrKIUYAQEBAQI?= =?us-ascii?q?BOAI/BQsLGC48GwYOiikFCKlBi0MBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEggyuCAoFRg?= =?us-ascii?q?iCCcoRehhkFkkyOXKdmSJRYAhEZAYE5NiGBDngVhWMcggeGSYEyAYEPAQEB?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.42,451,1500940800"; d="scan'208";a="299166390" Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2017 16:51:46 -0700 From: Govindarajulu Varadarajan To: Peter Zijlstra CC: , , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] lockdep: make MAX_LOCK_DEPTH configurable from Kconfig In-Reply-To: <20170928092600.qvehxzikcjr65hvw@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> Message-ID: References: <20170927214220.41216-1-gvaradar@cisco.com> <20170927214220.41216-5-gvaradar@cisco.com> <20170928092600.qvehxzikcjr65hvw@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (LNX 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format=flowed X-Originating-IP: [10.157.132.141] X-ClientProxiedBy: xch-aln-011.cisco.com (173.36.7.21) To XCH-RCD-012.cisco.com (173.37.102.22) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 633 Lines: 16 On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 02:42:20PM -0700, Govindarajulu Varadarajan wrote: >> Make MAX_LOCK_DEPTH configurable. It is set to 48 right now. Number of >> VFs under a PCI pf bus can exceed 48 and this disables lockdep. >> >> lockdep currently allows max of 63 held_locks. > > But why a config knob? Why not just raise the number to 64 > unconditionally? And is that sufficient; you only state 48 is > insufficient, you don't actually state the VF limit. > I did not want to change the default configuration for everyone. I will change it 63 unconditionally in v2 and resubmit the series.