on 16/11/2012 01:38 Attilio Rao said the following: > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 8:51 PM, Andriy Gapon <a...@freebsd.org> wrote: >> on 15/11/2012 22:00 Adrian Chadd said the following: >>> But I think my change is invaluable for development, where you want to >>> improve and debug the locking and lock interactions of a subsystem. >> >> My practical experience was that if you mess up one lock in one place, then >> it >> is a total mess further on. but apparently you've got a different practical >> experience :) >> What would indeed be invaluable to _me_ - if the LOR messages also produced >> the >> stack(s) where a supposedly correct lock order was learned. > > Please note that the "supposedly correct lock order", as for the > definition that it is correct, can be used in several different > stacks. I don't see the point of saving it somewhere. > The only helpful case would be if the "wrong order" is catched first. > If this is really the case, I suggest you to force the order you > expect in the static table so that the first time the wrong order > happens it yells.
Exactly my point - if I am a user of some code, not its developer, and I don't know which one is the correct order I would have had the complete information from the very start instead of having to jump through the hoops. -- Andriy Gapon _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
