On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 12:21 AM, Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 07, 2017 at 08:37:08PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 6:41 PM, Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Thu, Sep 07, 2017 at 09:33:16AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: >> >> Workqueue added manual acquisitions to catch deadlock cases. Now >> >> crossrelease was introduced, some of those are redundant because >> >> crossrelease-enabled wait_for_completeion() also does it. Removed it. >> > >> > This does not explain how it doesn't become the regular timing dependent >> > stuff cross-release normally is. >> >> Yes, I will add more explanation for it at the next spin. >> >> But, let me explain it a bit here to help you get it, since it's very >> simple. This has nothing to do with 'might' thing I introduced >> previously. For 'might' thing, I will start it after getting your response. >> >> Here, I just removed acquire() because wait_for_completion() >> already includes the acquire() by LOCKDEP_COMPLETIONS. >> That's all. > > Ah I see, but it does so using some fairly nasty completion init stuff. > The old code was far easier to read.
Agree. But, old code has redundant acquisitions, moreover uses sub-class to avoid false detection, even though they are the same class. I will try to enhance readability of completion init, and fix the incorrect use at the next spin. -- Thanks, Byungchul
