From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Cc: rcu <rcu@vger.kernel.org>, paulmck <paulmck@kernel.org>,
intel-gfx <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, Radoslaw Burny <rburny@google.com>,
Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
cgroups <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [RFC 00/12] locking: Separate lock tracepoints from lockdep/lock_stat (v1)
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2022 10:33:03 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YgTbz55YtOQbnA3m@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f8b7760f-16a2-6ada-de88-9e21a7e8fef9@redhat.com>
On Wed, Feb 09, 2022 at 03:17:38PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
>
> On 2/9/22 14:45, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 9, 2022 at 11:28 AM Mathieu Desnoyers
> > <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> wrote:
> > > ----- On Feb 9, 2022, at 2:22 PM, Namhyung Kim namhyung@kernel.org wrote:
> > > > I'm also concerning dynamic allocated locks in a data structure.
> > > > If we keep the info in a hash table, we should delete it when the
> > > > lock is gone. I'm not sure we have a good place to hook it up all.
> > > I was wondering about this use case as well. Can we make it mandatory to
> > > declare the lock "class" (including the name) statically, even though the
> > > lock per-se is allocated dynamically ? Then the initialization of the lock
> > > embedded within the data structure would simply refer to the lock class
> > > definition.
> > Isn't it still the same if we have static lock classes that the entry needs
> > to be deleted from the hash table when it frees the data structure?
> > I'm more concerned about free than alloc as there seems to be no
> > API to track that in a place.
>
> We may have to invent some new APIs to do that. For example,
> spin_lock_exit() can be the counterpart of spin_lock_init() and so on. Of
> course, existing kernel code have to be modified to designate the point
> after which a lock is no longer being used or is freed.
The canonical name is _destroy(). We even have mutex_destroy() except
it's usage isn't mandatory.
The easy way out is doing as lockdep does and hook into the memory
allocators and check every free'd hunk of memory for a lock. It does
hoever mean your data structure of choice needs to be able to answer: do
I have an entry in @range. Which mostly disqualifies a hash-table.
Still, I really don't think you need any of this, it's just bloat. A
very limited stack unwind for one of the two tracepoints should allow
you to find the offending lock just fine.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-10 9:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-08 18:41 [Intel-gfx] [RFC 00/12] locking: Separate lock tracepoints from lockdep/lock_stat (v1) Namhyung Kim
2022-02-08 18:42 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 05/12] drm/i915: Protect lockdep functions with #ifdef Namhyung Kim
2022-02-08 18:51 ` Jani Nikula
2022-02-08 19:22 ` Namhyung Kim
2022-02-09 13:49 ` Jani Nikula
2022-02-09 16:27 ` Steven Rostedt
2022-02-09 19:28 ` Namhyung Kim
2022-02-08 19:14 ` [Intel-gfx] [RFC 00/12] locking: Separate lock tracepoints from lockdep/lock_stat (v1) Namhyung Kim
2022-02-09 9:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-02-09 18:19 ` Waiman Long
2022-02-09 18:29 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2022-02-09 19:02 ` Waiman Long
2022-02-09 19:17 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2022-02-09 19:37 ` Waiman Long
2022-02-09 19:22 ` Namhyung Kim
2022-02-09 19:28 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2022-02-09 19:45 ` Namhyung Kim
2022-02-09 19:56 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2022-02-09 20:17 ` Waiman Long
2022-02-10 0:27 ` Namhyung Kim
2022-02-10 2:12 ` Waiman Long
2022-02-10 9:33 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2022-02-10 0:32 ` Namhyung Kim
2022-02-10 9:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
[not found] ` <20220210191404.GM4285@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1>
2022-02-10 19:27 ` Waiman Long
[not found] ` <20220210201058.GP4285@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1>
2022-02-11 5:57 ` Namhyung Kim
2022-02-11 5:55 ` Namhyung Kim
2022-02-11 10:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=YgTbz55YtOQbnA3m@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=byungchul.park@lge.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=rburny@google.com \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=will@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox