All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de>
Cc: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sysfs: differentiate  between locking links and non-links
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2010 13:42:10 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <m1fx57zbyl.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100210230625.GB678@suse.de> (Greg KH's message of "Wed\, 10 Feb 2010 15\:06\:25 -0800")

Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> writes:

> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:09:33PM +1100, Neil Brown wrote:
>> 
>> Hi,
>>  I've just spent a while sorting out some lockdep complaints triggered
>>  by the recent addition of the "s_active" lockdep annotation in sysfs
>>   (commit 846f99749ab68bbc7f75c74fec305de675b1a1bf)
>> 
>>  Some of them are genuine and I have submitted a fix for those.
>>  Some are, I think, debatable and I get to that is a minute.  I've
>>  submitted a fix for them anyway.
>>  But some are to my mind clearly bogus and I'm hoping that can be
>>  fixed by the change below (or similar).
>>  The 'bogus' ones are triggered by writing to a sysfs attribute file
>>  for which the handler tries to delete a symlink from sysfs.
>>  This appears to be a recursion on s_active as s_active is held while
>>  the handler runs and is again needed to effect the delete.  However
>>  as the thing being deleted is a symlink, it is very clearly a
>>  different object to the thing triggering the delete, so there is no
>>  real loop.
>> 
>>  The following patch splits the lockdep context in two - one for
>>  symlink and one for everything else.  This removes the apparent loop.
>>  (An example report can be seen in
>>      http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15142).
>> 
>>  The "debatable" dependency loops happen when writing to one attribute
>>  causes a different attribute to be deleted.  In my (md) case this can
>>  actually cause a deadlock as both the attributes take the same lock
>>  while the handler is running.  This is because deleting the attribute
>>  will block until the all accesses of that attribute have completed (I
>>  think).
>>  However it should be possible to delete a name from sysfs while there
>>  are still accesses pending (it works for normal files!!).  So if
>>  sysfs could be changed to simply unlink the file and leave deletion to
>>  happen when the refcount become zero it would certainly make my life
>>  a lot easier, and allow the removal of some ugly code from md.c.
>>  I don't know sysfs well enough to suggest a patch though.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> NeilBrown
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> commit 2e502cfe444b68f6ef6b8b2abe83b6112564095b
>> Author: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
>> Date:   Wed Feb 10 09:43:45 2010 +1100
>> 
>>     sysfs: differentiate  between locking links and non-links for sysfs
>>     
>>     symlinks and non-symlink is sysfs are very different.
>>     A symlink can never be locked (active) while an attribute
>>     modification routine is running.  So removing symlink from an
>>     attribute 'store' routine should be permitted without any lockdep
>>     warnings.
>>     
>>     So split the lockdep context for 's_active' in two, one for symlinks
>>     and other for everything else.
>>     
>>     Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
>
> Nice patch, I'll queue it up for .34.

Note the patch does not compile with lockdep disabled.

Eric

  reply	other threads:[~2010-02-11 21:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-02-10  1:09 [PATCH] sysfs: differentiate between locking links and non-links Neil Brown
2010-02-10  1:21 ` David Rientjes
2010-02-10  1:56   ` Américo Wang
2010-02-10  3:05     ` David Rientjes
2010-02-10  3:14       ` Américo Wang
2010-02-10  3:19         ` David Rientjes
2010-02-10  3:33           ` Américo Wang
2010-02-10  2:08 ` Américo Wang
2010-02-10  2:19   ` Tejun Heo
2010-02-10  3:12     ` Américo Wang
2010-02-10  8:03     ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-10 10:39       ` Tejun Heo
2010-02-10 18:25         ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-10 23:05           ` Greg KH
2010-02-11  1:31             ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-11  2:10               ` Tejun Heo
2010-02-11 18:08                 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-12  0:59                   ` Tejun Heo
2010-02-12  1:20                     ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-12  1:20                     ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-12  2:16                       ` Tejun Heo
2010-02-11 23:13                 ` [PATCH 0/4] Better sysfs lockdep Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-11 23:14                   ` [PATCH 1/4] sysfs: Remove sysfs_get/put_active_two Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-11 23:20                     ` [PATCH 2/4] sysfs: Only take active references on attributes Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-11 23:21                       ` [PATCH 3/4] sysfs: Use one lockdep class per sysfs attribute Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-11 23:23                         ` [PATCH 4/4] sysfs: Use sysfs_attr_init and sysfs_bin_attr_init on dynamic attributes Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-11 23:42                           ` Greg KH
2010-02-12 12:47                             ` [PATCH] sysfs: Document sysfs_attr_init and sysfs_bin_attr_init Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-12 21:41                               ` [PATCH] sysfs: Use sysfs_attr_init and sysfs_bin_attr_init on module dynamic attributes Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-15 10:38                           ` [PATCH 4/4] sysfs: Use sysfs_attr_init and sysfs_bin_attr_init on " Américo Wang
2010-02-15 12:53                             ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-15 10:35                         ` [PATCH 3/4] sysfs: Use one lockdep class per sysfs attribute Américo Wang
2010-02-15  7:27                       ` [PATCH 2/4] sysfs: Only take active references on attributes Américo Wang
2010-02-15  8:15                         ` Américo Wang
2010-02-15  8:31                           ` Américo Wang
2010-02-15 10:11                           ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-15  7:03                     ` [PATCH 1/4] sysfs: Remove sysfs_get/put_active_two Américo Wang
2010-02-11 23:18                   ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-11 23:17                 ` [PATCH 0/4] Better sysfs lockdep Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-11 23:43                   ` Greg KH
2010-02-10 23:54           ` [PATCH] sysfs: differentiate between locking links and non-links Tejun Heo
2010-02-11  0:38             ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-10 17:36 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-10 17:55   ` Dmitry Torokhov
2010-02-10 23:06 ` Greg KH
2010-02-11 21:42   ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2010-02-11 22:32     ` Greg KH
2010-02-11 22:47       ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-17 22:38         ` Greg KH
2010-02-18  0:39           ` Neil Brown
2010-02-18  1:01             ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-02-18  1:12               ` Greg KH

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=m1fx57zbyl.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org \
    --to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=gregkh@suse.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=neilb@suse.de \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    /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.