Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Wed, 26 Sep 2018 11:35:11 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To:     "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Justin Ernst <justin.ernst@hpe.com>, russ.anderson@hpe.com,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
        linux-edac@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Raise maximum number of memory controllers
Message-ID: <20180926093510.GA5584@zn.tnic>
References: <20180925143449.284634-1-justin.ernst@hpe.com>
 <20180925152659.GE23986@zn.tnic>
 <20180925175023.GA16725@agluck-desk>
 <20180925180458.GG23986@zn.tnic>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180925180458.GG23986@zn.tnic>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 08:07:33PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> Now I remember. I did that for lockdep because it wants statically
> allocated memory. I'll try to think of something tomorrow.

Some more info after some staring:

We could've made the lock_class_key only static storage so that lockdep
is happy but then struct bus_type embeds the *whole* lock_class_key and
not a pointer to it.

Which leaves us with either:

* this fix postponing the problem

* or Greg coming and saying, you're using bus_type all wrong and you
shouldn't and you should remove it completely! :-)

Which would be much better.

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.