Received: by 2002:a5b:505:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id o5csp6056933ybp; Tue, 8 Oct 2019 12:20:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwq28xJsuH60xnAarcO9qteQpbwaND5RBVEAYLT2BvQzMRAt4HkKxzhsPg7v+0Qjs/WB7N5 X-Received: by 2002:a50:9e26:: with SMTP id z35mr35463810ede.265.1570562418752; Tue, 08 Oct 2019 12:20:18 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1570562418; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=Fnr9Ekiadl2Oo9qS3iJdkwZCtVnR5lgmDH5F21Eyv+jLOL46LbOujkGj7qfm47DR7Z ASLBZ3CEEFilA6zxGr1DI6J/5ddlc2m7YSMaNJVwPN/GNir8MPe7Yjcmk7fEoE4t9yq+ DGBMko6gNOQlDcY4f1AK9HWk5ImCMnb0SXabdwCf1QCjg5nnpMEywHidgmh5nF7eQqGJ l6c1ty1Cthcp2BCwJTk8n9Zv+Cq3y5cwEodTzNIxfV1xgduJdXDyCHCtPqMoZ8dxdkeY lpgQytBJUfzZaxgFpaFUDvgSYm97s2bq/avBxV/lIhZxNJv+FzaJj0I3ausKsC1/axtP EBEA== 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=yPbL/hJE/KqgR8gSGaxrRS4PwAw1O5gGGul9pB76mtM=; b=crclU+BvGoL/C+FUlDY6g6ZPYNUQCMSoz/dFQ8TGq0Zm2ljeRkuUiwNW7JEzapQEsb zD/d4rSS33U5UMeutVZ8be8rWlL0V8+aAlJLPav0Sn7MFNIU13u99B2Of6ZFi5wCYa9i EvB0TKhEMsJP9xQKrmA9zDxMyWvDYmVJDC1c+s8vGUgtg333Z4juwtqmIx3xktML5J7g EvN3jPYPmCARqetv/ciP3t2PfkNAQ+GbeewZ79SRWyaYmQRaeE2imjPFpkQPluubIO4m 80HxD4Vz/OqyfARBeBz6bg9QLnbJqZk2mhg6FvrebF4rIKwVuyAJZWbcNvTmIHK8OJLd L7aQ== 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 v4si11246426edm.183.2019.10.08.12.19.55; Tue, 08 Oct 2019 12:20:18 -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=kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729616AbfJHTRc (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 8 Oct 2019 15:17:32 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:34248 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726439AbfJHTRc (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Oct 2019 15:17:32 -0400 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 7F338B112; Tue, 8 Oct 2019 19:17:30 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2019 21:17:28 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Qian Cai Cc: Christian Borntraeger , Petr Mladek , Peter Oberparleiter , akpm@linux-foundation.org, sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, peterz@infradead.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, john.ogness@linutronix.de, david@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Heiko Carstens , Vasily Gorbik Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm/page_isolation: fix a deadlock with printk() Message-ID: <20191008191728.GS6681@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <1570228005-24979-1-git-send-email-cai@lca.pw> <20191007143002.l37bt2lzqtnqjqxu@pathway.suse.cz> <20191007144937.GO2381@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20191008074357.f33f6pbs4cw5majk@pathway.suse.cz> <20191008082752.GB6681@dhcp22.suse.cz> <1570550917.5576.303.camel@lca.pw> <20191008183525.GQ6681@dhcp22.suse.cz> <1570561573.5576.307.camel@lca.pw> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1570561573.5576.307.camel@lca.pw> 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 Tue 08-10-19 15:06:13, Qian Cai wrote: > On Tue, 2019-10-08 at 20:35 +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: [...] > > I fully agree that this class of lockdep splats are annoying especially > > when they make the lockdep unusable but please discuss this with lockdep > > maintainers and try to find some solution rather than go and try to > > workaround the problem all over the place. If there are places that > > would result in a cleaner code then go for it but please do not make the > > code worse just because of a non existent problem flagged by a false > > positive. > > It makes me wonder what make you think it is a false positive for sure. Because this is an early init code? Because if it were a real deadlock then your system wouldn't boot to get run with the real userspace (remember there is zone->lock spinlock involved and that means that you would hit hard lock after few seconds - but I feel I am repeating myself). -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs