From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 41BF013C836 for ; Thu, 28 Nov 2024 00:00:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1732752038; cv=none; b=KjCEkSLeQDHqDMy4lkEitWnU7UWGFVP7eEk8dCOyNlxAmf0OEqPKkmUlglxRINSeCvhjf+fX5npLMlC9DmOsvcyRtsH6fbpIeFRxpYVQBpeO1kUfXNDNYL4H7pd2aYKvwUSTSJUVtnBVpGHcVmEoGR2WCwcEqKbIpWaEYIO/+Ds= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1732752038; c=relaxed/simple; bh=6gIsCc4IkC+hcRuhvD2ZNEKegFuh0ytvFOiQCLUT1ag=; h=From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=UkqY3YgiDiV4ZVxnta9qAunGQVtFoHPVOjBOFxN5oBqTaWFSFRXwQw/h7wgIrpTdqc5LSJLR+xaZcG4HlMXFpWHzCWfjWWxdm7iO398TW1lNLwMo/nWQAziY/C8v8cLzY0paloQe8N6oWGSv1xg0ouFDNkKw1XAy2zXKqIt0/kY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=gb18l8j8; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="gb18l8j8" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1732752034; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=4+R8uojgiebLHWmkDPWGhwU6Zssoy9XmlcsUZU81DYw=; b=gb18l8j8zoP6Amnl2HDPC7Za/FBPrQusWBarD78urUX7zNUHl2KGWIomlEz8UN0onkYVoG oVXMqGx2EWB2pT03iZqUvMdNUbEXdqbtuIJMKxh29JfPh955VjPE4iIFaw8NTdjlYMadcy /oP/xzs5VUwSP4M5cNRLvMJPNvmP1gs= Received: from mail-qt1-f197.google.com (mail-qt1-f197.google.com [209.85.160.197]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-223-LZZVHlavO9a9nUnKopwIFA-1; Wed, 27 Nov 2024 19:00:32 -0500 X-MC-Unique: LZZVHlavO9a9nUnKopwIFA-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: LZZVHlavO9a9nUnKopwIFA Received: by mail-qt1-f197.google.com with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-466bc740022so5404521cf.0 for ; Wed, 27 Nov 2024 16:00:32 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1732752032; x=1733356832; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:content-language:references :cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id:from :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=4+R8uojgiebLHWmkDPWGhwU6Zssoy9XmlcsUZU81DYw=; b=GbdNBL0LBCZGUAZWxltTYjLFXHPbesDy5yBlTzjk7k1k/bNDEHpjhV2vd42QlA1Zle b4+pj1/G4gDkR6um4aS2T8q1KMyvZ7TYLYVOQtuSAxGoFy1QYTy4ZuUU9RPCGcob0ZAw Bb0PAhdM2YKgh6XnLCVWqPUyfsiEe6dj/hnB7artTvZDFxhUOj2IlmjZKt5pvYXnWn03 y8LusxZQHmINmbkVVCWy0WQUmn+qu8On5t4M+OF4DKcInYbNoAOZiZCTWtaB0ttyz4kW NZS76Z+8LUOE8E4Q7usHTcJcm/wSOmyjVeXooj9dZS/vCRlj7yyKJgj8BvTftXyef34R Z12w== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWhkYwyTZO7QLzdpQdKxrNkvA3N13fHGzt5RacEepzIDPZeK3jd4v7QAYwQ9Gbew/z9pwD94GAzMFwoYv4=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzL1uAnqYor6x+n+RCK1wsUX5ED+NnsCgLpY/XnQNFLsHaCAbNw vvN41yeV0GOgangEtGfT5hxYlOlqvgX+UuiDQCMaO5tJ6W5N/YY2ZWDUwQel3G7wCfV5O3A/3fs ytLCLkUiCFmieKJmskzDusi+8ZXepVNnhA52xN8PuPwtdYJOMXgfllCWlPjhHYA== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncuqzAtab1PVSqJv47RHFtCUie7ot53TcrGKtiMylGb7YGq5vDYUsWdMTLZS1ic oZeXlsIcScjdZkGzZo+aFELGzepRX/5Scwvq63WstMqvJ1xwk+SP7e2WCRRCbh+OBkVdVIhvXWR sNdlKuxmbchqANfBhY3XbJgbKUa1XWObFiBiskUKngtYh5sI1rMgVJEXYElcahgrbS+l9ca1A9L gHKaVe/8aYYBKdkw34v10Cc+3dQo+dNDcdr2nYQ5H7rwiFd76K0IlXPtcgnOt26lOytw2qIbFR5 Xo9VjhLQvXTdX1J4K7DS X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:113:b0:466:a9e6:6d69 with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-466b359e51amr66981851cf.20.1732752032215; Wed, 27 Nov 2024 16:00:32 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHC11BrXt0UBkBasOn2RPwvpPJuTnd36onZqlY956vpd8yia/A9RX2+BB7AriqgXE136b0oNw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:113:b0:466:a9e6:6d69 with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-466b359e51amr66981141cf.20.1732752031266; Wed, 27 Nov 2024 16:00:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPV6:2601:408:c180:2530:d041:4c25:86b8:e76a? ([2601:408:c180:2530:d041:4c25:86b8:e76a]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d75a77b69052e-466c421d812sm838051cf.68.2024.11.27.16.00.29 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 27 Nov 2024 16:00:30 -0800 (PST) From: Waiman Long X-Google-Original-From: Waiman Long Message-ID: Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2024 19:00:29 -0500 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] locking/lockdep: Enforce PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING only if ARCH_SUPPORTS_RT To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Will Deacon , Boqun Feng , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Guenter Roeck References: <20241126231154.29151-1-longman@redhat.com> <20241127164442.catRG_Aw@linutronix.de> Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <20241127164442.catRG_Aw@linutronix.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 11/27/24 11:44 AM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > On 2024-11-26 18:11:54 [-0500], Waiman Long wrote: >> Relax the rule to set PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING by default only for arches >> that supports PREEMPT_RT. For arches that do not support PREEMPT_RT, >> they will not be forced to address irrelevant raw lock nesting issues >> when they want to enable PROVE_LOCKING. > I don't like the wording here. It is not "irrelevant raw lock nesting > issues". This is documented in Documentation/locking/locktypes.rst. > *IFF* we agree to ignore those because we don't want PREEMPT_RT on > certain architectures then okay. But please don't describe it as > irrelevant. Sorry for that. I will post a v2 patch to fix the wording. Cheers, Longman