On 01/12/2015 11:23 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >>> > > Alternatively, make better/more use of lock_acquired() and track the >>> > > acquire vs acquired information in the held_lock (1 bit) and look at it >>> > > when printing. >> > >> > We could do that, but then we'd lose the ability to get information out of >> > locks, what's the benefit of doing that? > That's mission creep; you never stated that as a goal. > > One of the reasons i'm not particularly keen on it is because it creates > a circular dependency between lock implementations and lockdep. It also > creates asymmetry between lock types/capabilty.
Fair enough. __lock_acquired() which looks up held_lock doesn't happen unless CONFIG_LOCK_STAT is set, which means that if we want to use this method we'd need to look up held_lock just for that, which would make that path heavier. Before I go ahead and implement it, do you find it acceptable? Thanks, Sasha -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
