From: Yuyang Du Date: Mon, 6 May 2019 08:19:27 +0000 (+0800) Subject: locking/lockdep: Update comment X-Git-Tag: v5.3-rc1~203^2~69 X-Git-Url: https://asedeno.scripts.mit.edu/gitweb/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=31a490e5c54f5499aa744f8524611e2a4b19f8ba;p=linux.git locking/lockdep: Update comment A leftover comment is removed. While at it, add more explanatory comments. Such a trivial patch! Signed-off-by: Yuyang Du Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Cc: Linus Torvalds Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Thomas Gleixner Cc: bvanassche@acm.org Cc: frederic@kernel.org Cc: ming.lei@redhat.com Cc: will.deacon@arm.com Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190506081939.74287-12-duyuyang@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar --- diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c index 6cf14c84eb6d..a9799f9ed093 100644 --- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c +++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c @@ -2811,10 +2811,16 @@ 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);