Received: by 2002:ad5:474a:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id i10csp3918765imu; Mon, 24 Dec 2018 11:11:53 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN5fABlBL235k10NzVMTddu4quqh6WSFNXdpOHGy2P3VsV5yPL3Nm3hT91p2AfAHCR7V5mDP X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:8f97:: with SMTP id z23mr14098020plo.283.1545678713047; Mon, 24 Dec 2018 11:11:53 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1545678713; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=NuX4ydsVaBSl6sZAiHn5RxLoSx/dzXRUqllm914dbMuQ8uef4G+uDmKm3HZBgzK3ub CQV1k6ReAr++/JqtGlzV6bm9jkRqtM/eRRWsV8AF37IIhc6QKjnii4Gf3ZUFSG82nh+t jIXbNnqlEus7WlWIq/My3TlNRBuBDJCrLx0IQ1UqyL9BlpATzYl0egaoiSIlvOPDXD7O kyfo+5nD4bc6n9xx4KcVLXeQ+v4qzeBjZsRF4pgUsO79oYChHK+3ODVzxSjhA9KNG2cV AIMwhKQWrihXwa/F41dfqBRlptlNu3Mx2s79imJQV6RpsiDvXgirtgnbSiDaHG/nq/I5 NHEA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date; bh=QCZP7zDDNExKaRrnWfu/vclfL3bOWq221FTKHR5j3CA=; b=Wnb3UwgeKSq/7gD54pHE3OnMEYZ/N+RSPQYcWVL8edLfNs6CpSkwx9qPZbsFpqpriK fumXP9OwUMWr2lqfGPdSNa0oUDT5jVRRYXla/ncB6b+LZBr8L8vP7ejzLYTUVULCCIRg au/ayRVPfJ6apJu12GyMyqmHYnczn4b7cMZtUlHdYSSxpK7RbNkdxaU63Fxxz6XvNcpG 7WPSy98jirMCkg0chHiVsg3MVk8jj5Br0jeU8NA7+GFKv3gJeYd0yI/X1SGHeWzy7uEE 6HhIdTEmmpWzzltZLceC0vq6ZTpCcjxav7DaWnMXSNPnQyggUPZN22XNzt7FesBD+fXh Kl8g== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 30si28062393pgr.396.2018.12.24.11.11.37; Mon, 24 Dec 2018 11:11:53 -0800 (PST) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725848AbeLXTKI (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 24 Dec 2018 14:10:08 -0500 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:50760 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725836AbeLXTKI (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Dec 2018 14:10:08 -0500 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29CE9ACB1; Mon, 24 Dec 2018 19:10:06 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 20:10:04 +0100 From: Michal Hocko To: Vineet Gupta Cc: "linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" , Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ARC: show_regs: fix lockdep splat for good Message-ID: <20181224191004.GE16738@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <1545159239-30628-1-git-send-email-vgupta@synopsys.com> <1545159239-30628-3-git-send-email-vgupta@synopsys.com> <20181220130450.GB17350@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20181221130404.GF16107@dhcp22.suse.cz> <8b3739f1-a7d5-7253-362a-3a1c707b0f6d@synopsys.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8b3739f1-a7d5-7253-362a-3a1c707b0f6d@synopsys.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri 21-12-18 09:55:34, Vineet Gupta wrote: > On 12/21/18 5:04 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: [...] > > Yes, the fix might be more involved but I would much rather prefer a > > correct code which builds on solid assumptions. > > Right so the first step is reverting the disabled semantics for ARC and do some > heavy testing to make sure any fallouts are addressed etc. And if that works, then > propagate this change to core itself. Low risk strategy IMO - agree ? Yeah, I would simply remove the preempt_disable and see what falls out. smp_processor_id could be converted to the raw version etc... -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs