On Fri, Apr 1, 2016, at 05:03, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Thu, 2016-03-31 at 18:45 -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > > > Eric, what's your take on Hannes's patch 2 ? > > Is it more accurate to ask lockdep to check for actual lock > > or lockdep can rely on owned flag? > > Potentially there could be races between setting the flag and > > actual lock... but that code is contained, so unlikely. > > Will we find the real issues with this 'stronger' check or > > just spend a ton of time adapting to new model like your other > > patch for release_sock and whatever may need to come next... > > More precise lockdep checks are certainly good, I only objected to 4/4 > trying to work around another bug. > > But why do we rush for 'net' tree ? > > This looks net-next material to me. > > Locking changes are often subtle, lets take the time to do them > properly.
I certainly can see my mistake now trying to paper over the splats. Do you object if I send the first patches to fix up the reported lockdep?
