lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Mar]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
From
Subject[PATCH v3 11/18] locking/lockdep: Update comment
Date
An out-of-nowhere comment is removed. While at it, add more explanatory
comments. Such a trivial patch!

Signed-off-by: Yuyang Du <duyuyang@gmail.com>
---
kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 12 +++++++++---
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
index c7aec9f..eccfb0b 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
@@ -2720,10 +2720,16 @@ static int validate_chain(struct task_struct *curr,
* - is softirq-safe, if this lock is hardirq-unsafe
*
* And check whether the new lock's dependency graph
- * could lead back to the previous lock.
+ * could lead back to the previous lock:
*
- * any of these scenarios could lead to a deadlock. If
- * All validations
+ * - within the current held-lock stack
+ * - across our accumulated lock dependency records
+ *
+ * any of these scenarios could lead to a deadlock.
+ */
+ /*
+ * The simple case: does the current hold the same lock
+ * already?
*/
int ret = check_deadlock(curr, hlock, hlock->read);

--
1.8.3.1
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-03-21 08:59    [W:0.093 / U:6.984 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site