From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932771AbYETR0i (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 May 2008 13:26:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1765407AbYETR0B (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 May 2008 13:26:01 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:37788 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1765233AbYETRZ5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 May 2008 13:25:57 -0400 Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 10:22:59 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Dave Young Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, matthew@wil.cx, kay.sievers@vrfy.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3][-mm] reclassify the sg_sysfs_class mutex Message-ID: <20080520172259.GB11666@kroah.com> References: <20080520095851.GB3201@darkstar.te-china.tietoenator.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080520095851.GB3201@darkstar.te-china.tietoenator.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 05:58:51PM +0800, Dave Young wrote: > [Please first apply the patch 1/3 before this] > > To please lockdep here we use class_reclassify to change > the lock class of sg_sysfs_class Are you suggesting we do this for every struct class in the kernel? If so, why not just do it in the class core, instead of having to modify every single caller? I don't think the overall idea of this patch set is acceptable anyway :( thanks, greg k-h