On Tue, 2018-12-04 at 09:14 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 10:16:59AM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 18:32 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 08:40:48AM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > > > How about the following alternative
On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 10:16:59AM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 18:32 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 08:40:48AM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> >
> > > > I think we can do this with a free bitmap and an array of 2 pending
> > > > bitmaps and an in
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 18:32 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 08:40:48AM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>
> > > I think we can do this with a free bitmap and an array of 2 pending
> > > bitmaps and an index. Add newly freed entries to the pending bitmap
> > > indicated by the c
On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 08:40:48AM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > I think we can do this with a free bitmap and an array of 2 pending
> > bitmaps and an index. Add newly freed entries to the pending bitmap
> > indicated by the current index, when complete flip the index -- such
> > that further
On Sat, 2018-12-01 at 21:24 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 08:48:50AM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > On Thu, 2018-11-29 at 13:01 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 11:49:02AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 03:43:20PM -
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 08:48:50AM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-11-29 at 13:01 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 11:49:02AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 03:43:20PM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > > > /*
> > > >
On Thu, 2018-11-29 at 13:01 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 11:49:02AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 03:43:20PM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > > /*
> > >* Remove all dependencies this lock is
> > >* involved in:
> > >*/
> > > + list
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 11:49:02AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 03:43:20PM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > Instead of abandoning elements of list_entries[] that are no longer in
> > use, make alloc_list_entry() reuse array elements that have been freed.
>
> > diff --git
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 03:43:20PM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> Instead of abandoning elements of list_entries[] that are no longer in
> use, make alloc_list_entry() reuse array elements that have been freed.
> diff --git a/include/linux/lockdep.h b/include/linux/lockdep.h
> index 43327a1dd488.
Instead of abandoning elements of list_entries[] that are no longer in
use, make alloc_list_entry() reuse array elements that have been freed.
Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche
---
include/linux/lockdep.h | 5 +
kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 23 ---
2 files changed, 21 insert
10 matches
Mail list logo