Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759344AbXHaOhW (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Aug 2007 10:37:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754573AbXHaOhK (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Aug 2007 10:37:10 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:40824 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754194AbXHaOhJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Aug 2007 10:37:09 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Increase lockdep MAX_LOCK_DEPTH From: Peter Zijlstra To: Eric Sandeen Cc: David Chinner , linux-kernel Mailing List , xfs-oss , Ingo Molnar In-Reply-To: <46D826BA.1060705@sandeen.net> References: <46D79C62.1010304@sandeen.net> <1188542389.6112.44.camel@twins> <20070831135042.GD422459@sgi.com> <46D826BA.1060705@sandeen.net> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 16:36:52 +0200 Message-Id: <1188571012.6112.67.camel@twins> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 871 Lines: 21 On Fri, 2007-08-31 at 09:33 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > Peter, unless there is some other reason to do so, changing xfs > performance behavior simply to satisfy lockdep limitations* doesn't seem > like the best plan. > > I suppose one slightly flakey option would be for xfs to see whether > lockdep is enabled and adjust cluster size based on MAX_LOCK_DEPTH... on > the argument that lockdep is likely used in debugging kernels where > sheer performance is less important... but, that sounds pretty flakey to me. Agreed, that sucks too :-/ I was hoping there would be a 'nice' solution, a well, again, reality ruins it. - 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/