Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750733AbWINPEG (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Sep 2006 11:04:06 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750736AbWINPEF (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Sep 2006 11:04:05 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:25233 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750733AbWINPED (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Sep 2006 11:04:03 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Synaptics - fix lockdep warnings From: Arjan van de Ven To: Dmitry Torokhov Cc: Jiri Kosina , Andrew Morton , lkml , Dave Jones In-Reply-To: References: <200609132200.51342.dtor@insightbb.com> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Intel International BV Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 17:03:57 +0200 Message-Id: <1158246237.2931.33.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 (2.2.3-2.fc4) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1484 Lines: 33 On Thu, 2006-09-14 at 10:58 -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On 9/14/06, Jiri Kosina wrote: > > On Thu, 14 Sep 2006, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > > > Can we add lock_class_key to the struct psmouse and use it to define > > > per-device mutex class regardless of whether it is a child, grandchild > > > or a parent? > > > > Hi Dmitry, > > > > what do you think about the patches below? I have used a slightly > > different approach, as we also need to get rid of the spurious lockdep > > warning in case of recursive call of serio_interrupt(), which can't be > > handled well with lock subclass stored in struct psmouse. What do you > > think about this? It shuts up the lockdep, and seems much cleaner to me. > > > > Yes, this is much, much better. Could you please tell me if depth > should be a true depth or just an unique number? The reason I am > asking is that I hope to get rid of parent/child pointers in serio > (they were introduced when driver core could not handle recursive > addition/removing of devices on the same bus). lockdep sort of expects the depth to be a number between 0 and 7. Other than that lockdep does not assume an ordering based on numerical value at all; it figures that out at runtime. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/