From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 013.lax.mailroute.net (013.lax.mailroute.net [199.89.1.16]) (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 EA9392FF164 for ; Tue, 5 May 2026 07:50:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=199.89.1.16 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1777967428; cv=none; b=bez/TNq9K2CkXWeCxyZIHDqDQ4nGjXakTLzgEBKz6ClaBlgItFgobDXACJa6Dy5+LjPshhkm513nKtqTTZJBY8OtgTXsCsG406B/S3oPm7ryOfwbP5LZfca4RLAnng+G7yWCrmvjXdhWRkDKiv0On0nJoH8Vz4xrzjZb3BWl+TQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1777967428; c=relaxed/simple; bh=TIhVxbpasP9m7gswhu+nkD2xfwIe4CZdl2EnPj5GYNs=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=ZvgtJLaLU4Nv+sB/WSmhpH+NFUrbkLGqBh3a44vmGCJdRw+ViQs6RAqhUzpDQlxNtAcug3pmFXukvvdIZkAayRjCMLf0KK5r/2iQEqHnYDQIIfa6BwfOZFNxM10qf5QHbnGT1ZYYFj60a2YodYsBUA+y0lHPN67T1tFnPw5EwYg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=acm.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=acm.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=acm.org header.i=@acm.org header.b=tzrmp0En; arc=none smtp.client-ip=199.89.1.16 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=acm.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=acm.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=acm.org header.i=@acm.org header.b="tzrmp0En" Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by 013.lax.mailroute.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4g8rKG3cJNzlgr4F; Tue, 5 May 2026 07:50:26 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=acm.org; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:in-reply-to :from:from:content-language:references:subject:subject :user-agent:mime-version:date:date:message-id:received:received; s=mr01; t=1777967422; x=1780559423; bh=TIhVxbpasP9m7gswhu+nkD2x fwIe4CZdl2EnPj5GYNs=; b=tzrmp0En2MLLggW+J4miFrKkcsyFwFmMULN9UG43 lkDfdOA5iU71SLHucm6lfe3War52P3R90CthCT4ByjhP9qsXXljkKo4cMSAkvQ85 ZF4lSlCkDLlf/SV34jIUt6BRiok9L09BKNppsGtQzf2xbTzt3Txsjah47ZzgmZqD uL4fGGAQjwuXKR7rHN6fwIisI9UcXt4cZf1xt/KOaiSK7TRlF7/78OyiYchu2JuN 0m9Y4KEFSGbFCblf1HcyFisbmqVjvxey7a0emr2sLiSLS6MxgSsAjwYdeYwqvrLb Qx47xHiwUSDLi+m3xtrHDGh7B+UkWGBQ1lKQmKY1nfmJPg== X-Virus-Scanned: by MailRoute Received: from 013.lax.mailroute.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (013.lax [127.0.0.1]) (mroute_mailscanner, port 10029) with LMTP id Ii8UsDs-yvso; Tue, 5 May 2026 07:50:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.211.9.52] (unknown [213.147.98.98]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: bvanassche@acm.org) by 013.lax.mailroute.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4g8rK24xwrzlfvqD; Tue, 5 May 2026 07:50:14 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 5 May 2026 09:50:11 +0200 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 v2] locking/rtmutex: Annotate API and implementation To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Marco Elver , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , Will Deacon , Boqun Feng , Clark Williams , Steven Rostedt , Joel Granados , Alexei Starovoitov , Vlastimil Babka References: <20260505022649.870788-1-bvanassche@acm.org> <20260505070133.nrk1GBem@linutronix.de> <20260505073223.tm_mpwd4@linutronix.de> Content-Language: en-US From: Bart Van Assche In-Reply-To: <20260505073223.tm_mpwd4@linutronix.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 5/5/26 9:32 AM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > I see. I don't know why CONTEXT_ANALYSIS_rtmutex was skipped. Was this > just a regular compile with newer clang or was there more to it? I do > remember clang was not complaining but then context-analysis flag was > missing=E2=80=A6 Hi Sebastian, This was noticed by enabling CONFIG_WARN_CONTEXT_ANALYSIS_ALL=3Dn. I'm no= t sure why this was not noticed earlier. Maybe as the result of an oversight? Thanks, Bart.