From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>, shenghui <shhuiw@foxmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] locking/lockdep: Make lockdep_register_key() ignore 'debug_locks'
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2019 07:47:19 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190412054719.GA80743@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190411172612.39180-1-bvanassche@acm.org>
* Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org> wrote:
> If lockdep_register_key() and lockdep_unregister_key() are called with
> debug_locks == false then the following warning is reported:
>
> WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 15145 at kernel/locking/lockdep.c:4920 lockdep_unregister_key+0x1ad/0x240
>
> That warning is reported because lockdep_unregister_key() ignores the
> value of 'debug_locks' and because the behavior of lockdep_register_key()
> depends on whether or not 'debug_locks' is set. Fix this inconsistency
> by making lockdep_register_key() unconditionally register lock keys.
>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> Cc: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
> Cc: shenghui <shhuiw@foxmail.com>
> Reported-by: shenghui <shhuiw@foxmail.com>
> Fixes: a0b0fd53e1e6 ("locking/lockdep: Free lock classes that are no longer in use") # v5.1-rc1.
> Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
> ---
> kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 7 ++++---
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> index d2d65bbfae01..a228509b62f1 100644
> --- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> +++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> @@ -1027,15 +1027,16 @@ void lockdep_register_key(struct lock_class_key *key)
> hash_head = keyhashentry(key);
>
> raw_local_irq_save(flags);
> - if (!graph_lock())
> - goto restore_irqs;
> + arch_spin_lock(&lockdep_lock);
> + current->lockdep_recursion = 1;
> hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(k, hash_head, hash_entry) {
> if (WARN_ON_ONCE(k == key))
> goto out_unlock;
> }
> hlist_add_head_rcu(&key->hash_entry, hash_head);
> out_unlock:
> - graph_unlock();
> + current->lockdep_recursion = 0;
> + arch_spin_unlock(&lockdep_lock);
> restore_irqs:
> raw_local_irq_restore(flags);
> }
So why don't we add a debug_locks test to lockdep_unregister_key()
instead? The general principle to bring lockdep to a screeching halt when
bugs are detected, ASAP.
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-12 5:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-04-11 17:26 [PATCH] locking/lockdep: Make lockdep_register_key() ignore 'debug_locks' Bart Van Assche
2019-04-12 5:47 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2019-04-12 15:32 ` Bart Van Assche
2019-04-13 8:29 ` Ingo Molnar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190412054719.GA80743@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=shhuiw@foxmail.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.