intel-xe.lists.freedesktop.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Thomas Hellström" <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
To: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: "Thomas Hellström" <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>,
	"Matthew Auld" <matthew.auld@intel.com>,
	"Matthew Brost" <matthew.brost@intel.com>,
	"Maarten Lankhorst" <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
	"Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@redhat.com>, "Will Deacon" <will@kernel.org>,
	"Boqun Feng" <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
	"Waiman Long" <longman@redhat.com>,
	"Sumit Semwal" <sumit.semwal@linaro.org>,
	"Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH 1/2] kernel/locking/ww_mutex: Add per-lock lock-check helpers
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2025 12:03:40 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251120110341.2425-2-thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251120110341.2425-1-thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>

Code using ww_mutexes typically by design have a number of
such mutexes sharing the same ww_class, and within a ww transaction
they are all lockdep annotated using a nest_lock which means
that multiple ww_mutexes of the same lockdep class may be locked at
the same time. That means that lock_is_held() returns true and
lockdep_assert_held() doesn't fire as long as there is a *single*
ww_mutex held of the same class. IOW within a WW transaction.

Code using these mutexes typically want to assert that individual
ww_mutexes are held. Not that any ww_mutex of the same class is
held.

Introduce functions that can be used for that.

RFC: Placement of the functions? lockdep.c? Are the #ifdefs testing for
the correct config?

Signed-off-by: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
---
 include/linux/ww_mutex.h | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
 kernel/locking/mutex.c   | 10 ++++++++++
 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+)

diff --git a/include/linux/ww_mutex.h b/include/linux/ww_mutex.h
index 45ff6f7a872b..7bc0f533dea6 100644
--- a/include/linux/ww_mutex.h
+++ b/include/linux/ww_mutex.h
@@ -380,4 +380,22 @@ static inline bool ww_mutex_is_locked(struct ww_mutex *lock)
 	return ww_mutex_base_is_locked(&lock->base);
 }
 
+#ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING
+
+bool ww_mutex_held(struct ww_mutex *lock);
+
+#else /* CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING */
+
+static inline bool ww_mutex_held(struct ww_mutex *lock)
+{
+	return true;
+}
+
+#endif /* CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING */
+
+static inline void ww_mutex_assert_held(struct ww_mutex *lock)
+{
+	lockdep_assert(ww_mutex_held(lock));
+}
+
 #endif
diff --git a/kernel/locking/mutex.c b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
index de7d6702cd96..37868b739efd 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/mutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
@@ -1174,3 +1174,13 @@ int atomic_dec_and_mutex_lock(atomic_t *cnt, struct mutex *lock)
 	return 1;
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(atomic_dec_and_mutex_lock);
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING
+
+bool ww_mutex_held(struct ww_mutex *lock)
+{
+	return __ww_mutex_owner(&lock->base) == current;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(ww_mutex_held);
+
+#endif /* CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING */
-- 
2.51.1


  reply	other threads:[~2025-11-20 11:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-11-20 11:03 [RFC PATCH 0/2] locking/ww_mutex, dma-buf/dma-resv: Improve detection of unheld locks Thomas Hellström
2025-11-20 11:03 ` Thomas Hellström [this message]
2025-11-20 11:38   ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] kernel/locking/ww_mutex: Add per-lock lock-check helpers Peter Zijlstra
2025-11-20 11:03 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] dma-buf/dma-resv: Improve the dma-resv lockdep checks Thomas Hellström
2025-11-20 13:22   ` Christian König
2025-11-20 12:59 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning for locking/ww_mutex, dma-buf/dma-resv: Improve detection of unheld locks Patchwork
2025-11-20 13:01 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2025-11-20 13:19 ` ✗ CI.checksparse: warning " Patchwork
2025-11-20 13:47 ` ✗ Xe.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2025-11-20 16:23 ` ✗ Xe.CI.Full: " Patchwork

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=20251120110341.2425-2-thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com \
    --to=thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=christian.koenig@amd.com \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=matthew.auld@intel.com \
    --cc=matthew.brost@intel.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=sumit.semwal@linaro.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).