From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755387AbXJGQ7w (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Oct 2007 12:59:52 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754373AbXJGQ7p (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Oct 2007 12:59:45 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:42661 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752567AbXJGQ7p (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Oct 2007 12:59:45 -0400 Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2007 09:58:53 -0700 From: Arjan van de Ven To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Cc: Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: lockdep: how to tell it multiple pte locks is OK? Message-ID: <20071007095853.13a8755d@laptopd505.fenrus.org> In-Reply-To: <47087D45.2010904@goop.org> References: <47087D45.2010904@goop.org> Organization: Intel X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.0.1 (GTK+ 2.12.0; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 06 Oct 2007 23:31:33 -0700 > I'm presume I'm the first person to try holding multiple pte locks at > once, so there's no existing locking order for these locks. I'm > always traversing and locking the pagetable in virtual address order > (and this seems like a sane-enough rule for anyone else who wants to > hold multiple pte locks). I'm not sure that's a valid assumption in light of things like sharing pagetables between processes etc etc.. (granted, that one is out of tree right now but I still hope it'll go in some day:)