Re: How to avoid spurious lockdep warnings?

[Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>]

On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 16:02:11 -0700
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org> wrote:

> In a Xen system, when a new pagetable is about to be put in use it is 
> "pinned", meaning that each page in the pagetable is registered with
> the hypervisor.  This is done in arch/x86/xen/mmu.c:pin_page().
> 
> In order to make this efficient, the hypercalls for pinning are
> batched, so that multiple pages are submitted at once in a single
> multicall. While a page is batched pending the hypercall, its
> corresponding pte_lock is held.
> 
> This means that the code can end up holding multiple pte locks at
> once, though it is guaranteed to never try to hold the same lock at
> once. However, because these locks are in the same lock class, I get
> a spurious warning from lockdep.  Is there some way I can get rid of
> this warning?


what's the ordering guarantee between these locks ?


-- 
If you want to reach me at my work email, use arjan@linux.intel.com
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org