Received: by 2002:a25:8b12:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id i18csp518326ybl; Fri, 9 Aug 2019 09:22:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzZOwXQERPTwyPJV0R2UIsiKR4ucMSyPOobiDNGsD1p6IJ6G6FOQL6EoI1GBS895iWes942 X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:e202:: with SMTP id ce2mr19054797plb.272.1565367779031; Fri, 09 Aug 2019 09:22:59 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1565367779; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=cQizCLI68awEzrPnPGInqirTT+147CLcxCA22fuHeQKOK4RDfxOwnixsydHbsLDRX7 ZgUrnCBp48r2LFEs/C8XSGazxb7Xz+3f3KX0ftVJ1d8LD7bQvoqevEXLqZTVBFafs7NA v+1fmen2SD2E1hMSiANcfJVFbxsJBmw9ejTXHS70rD3cv8wLzmA+WzqoXj9ayBlQLtY6 s1emIcTvlDPjXGd3iZW2CnGAq3MzWjlw29hptOfrnoly2Bi3nONJUAO8RalpmkTMFU2p gt/uAJ7G2HKRWABuHPe6UXOpPOpOy4toT+YloVF6cbvokE999zOExrY8Dgijh9VGWdat 6/aw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding :content-language:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date :message-id:from:references:cc:to:subject; bh=9w3hPOJizFHZNI4OhxbSwhSHndcuk3QXQPPHlkooHhk=; b=B5tauJtWC+2ihtNHq09Qxlj6PzFqc1jqE6DWgtSXSZeEX6Ri2795b/O+4KMb0YJDnN 2EdaO3BF2QFHmSpZ/RBaJpqXWsDbVbCfG3DlYxIW+6qZYC70gzR8FyNf3YOiiU6hBPua cUu7LpOyQ+qor3jc5A1R/KZctXV8mCF+1DwjDFMILJbWdNr19pIM+py/Zo3f2NQ77hDT S/Sn07pbFiOkscFGXxYtXD1bxjbYQ48T6XqHNoNSSOxllrZ0g6Cgm1fuErBeeFlQXWyg obHV0EYrPUTWQnquu5NaXMX+WfrbQxaSRqmpr4nP6m8JJhcnmHHWpHixs6+HT8zzXTcq hL5Q== 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=intel.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id p20si57304259pgk.158.2019.08.09.09.22.44; Fri, 09 Aug 2019 09:22:59 -0700 (PDT) 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=intel.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2437285AbfHIQUX (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 9 Aug 2019 12:20:23 -0400 Received: from mga07.intel.com ([134.134.136.100]:33507 "EHLO mga07.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2437153AbfHIQUW (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Aug 2019 12:20:22 -0400 X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by orsmga105.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Aug 2019 09:20:15 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.64,364,1559545200"; d="scan'208";a="203968184" Received: from rchatre-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.251.6.227]) ([10.251.6.227]) by fmsmga002-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 09 Aug 2019 09:20:14 -0700 Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 09/10] x86/resctrl: Pseudo-lock portions of multiple resources To: Borislav Petkov Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, fenghua.yu@intel.com, tony.luck@intel.com, kuo-lang.tseng@intel.com, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20190807152511.GB24328@zn.tnic> <20190808084416.GC20745@zn.tnic> <20190809073807.GC2152@zn.tnic> From: Reinette Chatre Message-ID: Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2019 09:20:14 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190809073807.GC2152@zn.tnic> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Borislav, On 8/9/2019 12:38 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 01:13:46PM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote: >> There is a locking order dependency between cpu_hotplug_lock and >> rdtgroup_mutex (cpu_hotplug_lock before rdtgroup_mutex) that has to be >> maintained. To do so in this flow you will find cpus_read_lock() in >> rdtgroup_schemata_write(), so quite a distance from where it is needed. >> >> Perhaps I should add a comment at the location where the lock is >> required to document where the lock is obtained? > > Even better - you can add: > > lockdep_assert_cpus_held(); > > above it which documents *and* checks too. :-) > Will do. Thank you Reinette