From: Louis Rilling <Louis.Rilling@kerlabs.com>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Cc: Joel.Becker@oracle.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com
Subject: [Ocfs2-devel] [RFC][PATCH 0/3] configfs: Make nested default groups lockdep-friendly
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 19:08:54 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <483305A6.3040906@kerlabs.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080520095810.1d50d247@infradead.org>
Arjan van de Ven a ?crit :
> On Tue, 20 May 2008 18:33:20 +0200
> Louis Rilling <Louis.Rilling@kerlabs.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> The following patches fix lockdep warnings resulting from (correct)
>> recursive locking in configfs.
>>
>> Current lockdep annotations for inode mutexes in configfs are
>> lockdep-friendly provided that:
>> 1/ config_groups have at most one level of default groups (see
>> configfs_attach_group()),
>> 2/ config_groups having default groups are never removed (see
>> configfs_detach_prep()).
>>
>> Since lockdep does not handle such correct recursion, the idea is to
>> insert lockdep_off()/lockdep_on() for inode mutexes as soon as the
>> level of recursion of the I_MUTEX_PARENT -> I_MUTEX_CHILD dependency
>> pattern increases.
>
> I'm... not entirely happy with such a solution ;(
>
> there must be a better one.
Hmm, to me there are three solutions:
1/ keep lockdep and configfs like they are, and use this patchset
2/ enhance lockdep to handle wariable-depth but correct recursion:
seems uncertain...
3/ remove this recursive locking from configfs:
unfortunately, it seems that there are a good reasons for doing
recursive inode locking, at least when removing a config_group with
default groups. So, seems uncertain too...
Other ideas?
--
Dr Louis Rilling Kerlabs
Skype: louis.rilling Batiment Germanium
Phone: (+33|0) 6 80 89 08 23 80 avenue des Buttes de Coesmes
http://www.kerlabs.com/ 35700 Rennes
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Louis Rilling <Louis.Rilling@kerlabs.com>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Cc: Joel.Becker@oracle.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] configfs: Make nested default groups lockdep-friendly
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 19:08:54 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <483305A6.3040906@kerlabs.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080520095810.1d50d247@infradead.org>
Arjan van de Ven a écrit :
> On Tue, 20 May 2008 18:33:20 +0200
> Louis Rilling <Louis.Rilling@kerlabs.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> The following patches fix lockdep warnings resulting from (correct)
>> recursive locking in configfs.
>>
>> Current lockdep annotations for inode mutexes in configfs are
>> lockdep-friendly provided that:
>> 1/ config_groups have at most one level of default groups (see
>> configfs_attach_group()),
>> 2/ config_groups having default groups are never removed (see
>> configfs_detach_prep()).
>>
>> Since lockdep does not handle such correct recursion, the idea is to
>> insert lockdep_off()/lockdep_on() for inode mutexes as soon as the
>> level of recursion of the I_MUTEX_PARENT -> I_MUTEX_CHILD dependency
>> pattern increases.
>
> I'm... not entirely happy with such a solution ;(
>
> there must be a better one.
Hmm, to me there are three solutions:
1/ keep lockdep and configfs like they are, and use this patchset
2/ enhance lockdep to handle wariable-depth but correct recursion:
seems uncertain...
3/ remove this recursive locking from configfs:
unfortunately, it seems that there are a good reasons for doing
recursive inode locking, at least when removing a config_group with
default groups. So, seems uncertain too...
Other ideas?
--
Dr Louis Rilling Kerlabs
Skype: louis.rilling Batiment Germanium
Phone: (+33|0) 6 80 89 08 23 80 avenue des Buttes de Coesmes
http://www.kerlabs.com/ 35700 Rennes
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-20 17:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-05-20 16:33 [Ocfs2-devel] [RFC][PATCH 0/3] configfs: Make nested default groups lockdep-friendly Louis Rilling
2008-05-20 16:33 ` Louis Rilling
2008-05-20 16:33 ` [Ocfs2-devel] [RFC][PATCH 1/3] configfs: set CONFIGFS_USET_DEFAULT earlier in configfs_attach_group() Louis Rilling
2008-05-20 16:33 ` Louis Rilling
2008-05-20 16:33 ` [Ocfs2-devel] [RFC][PATCH 2/3] configfs: Silence lockdep when creating nested default groups Louis Rilling
2008-05-20 16:33 ` Louis Rilling
2008-05-20 16:33 ` [Ocfs2-devel] [RFC][PATCH 3/3] configfs: Silence lockdep when destroying " Louis Rilling
2008-05-20 16:33 ` Louis Rilling
2008-05-20 16:58 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/3] configfs: Make nested default groups lockdep-friendly Arjan van de Ven
2008-05-20 16:58 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Arjan van de Ven
2008-05-20 17:08 ` Louis Rilling [this message]
2008-05-20 17:08 ` Louis Rilling
2008-05-20 21:56 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Joel Becker
2008-05-20 21:56 ` Joel Becker
2008-05-20 22:13 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-05-20 22:14 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Arjan van de Ven
2008-05-20 22:27 ` Joel Becker
2008-05-20 22:27 ` Joel Becker
2008-05-20 22:35 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-05-20 22:36 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Arjan van de Ven
2008-05-20 23:51 ` Joel Becker
2008-05-20 23:51 ` Joel Becker
2008-05-21 9:20 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Peter Zijlstra
2008-05-21 9:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-05-21 9:23 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Peter Zijlstra
2008-05-21 9:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-05-21 10:25 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Louis Rilling
2008-05-21 10:25 ` Louis Rilling
2008-05-21 10:59 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Peter Zijlstra
2008-05-21 10:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-05-21 12:54 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Louis Rilling
2008-05-21 12:54 ` Louis Rilling
2008-05-21 22:09 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Joel Becker
2008-05-21 22:09 ` Joel Becker
2008-05-21 8:13 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Louis Rilling
2008-05-21 8:13 ` Louis Rilling
2008-05-20 21:41 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Joel Becker
2008-05-20 21:41 ` Joel Becker
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=483305A6.3040906@kerlabs.com \
--to=louis.rilling@kerlabs.com \
--cc=Joel.Becker@oracle.com \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.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.