Commit 31a490e5 authored by Yuyang Du's avatar Yuyang Du Committed by Ingo Molnar

locking/lockdep: Update comment

A leftover comment is removed. While at it, add more explanatory
comments. Such a trivial patch!
Signed-off-by: default avatarYuyang Du <duyuyang@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
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.comSigned-off-by: default avatarIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
parent 0b9fc8ec
......@@ -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);
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment