From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on archive.lwn.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by archive.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9C1B7D90F for ; Tue, 13 Aug 2019 13:39:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729025AbfHMNjJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Aug 2019 09:39:09 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-f196.google.com ([209.85.215.196]:32960 "EHLO mail-pg1-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728912AbfHMNjJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Aug 2019 09:39:09 -0400 Received: by mail-pg1-f196.google.com with SMTP id n190so10471890pgn.0 for ; Tue, 13 Aug 2019 06:39:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelfernandes.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=vZ4qRl5GH3pXgJ8QcX2FUPhCShp8z1W2H/JG9jmcgUQ=; b=CgzLkOQRxuhEBOUF0+zsdgi+38LK9wvcRjrW6r3lKt70COM2JzjnuDbP5SugUaBvxV cMhuuKyfooHJ0nKm40NjAKVd8RDGEmlP2jKzXvGURL/Le3aTWeAt4xQ3EFku39ZEHvha Yx/SrOKhRweR9hM+s8WMsC705aD92V/qwTves= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=vZ4qRl5GH3pXgJ8QcX2FUPhCShp8z1W2H/JG9jmcgUQ=; b=Jdu+0I9V4Y46Zmh/OdKYtMfF2UyQ68EhaH6cm8T2TOk36xcVZ1IaGuvXyVJNW7TZys 9DFLxDiR1hje4Q11cyKhH0ou7mSo+PQLt6N13xvDsXvofQF4F51lYYROGT0OzUZRg6ij fO6VspF8g9Ns+24P7gPW24lFogPvOcLE9FTlKTozvxw/5wpSOeHXyPYCRLkxFG9+fvAV H0Gty+SKhupnegHvwin9ehhuh7O//JfFhJbCKQEjUm4gZd2vSRdLi7tVF44GioTzEoTn IlIGo0SFksCn1IsDEBNl3sKxlDEVZpqkO3tNyubHY3WFjY6FimqYDPS57sl+5YMrqdBP Tfcw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAU29PL2wZfWo5Vl6oLKoxEWKzwE7+3+4xYQYs+CwQuRSRdZZ5sN eYWU45gD1IVZ4lmlVNqlx+ZPCA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzjab9ev9BM0e2Bi1vzoZ3eoCT46g1H+Il3bRqI5lOuTV8ZxHTvwHeNJHFk1wFHk6Xp2ta7uA== X-Received: by 2002:a62:8f91:: with SMTP id n139mr39294103pfd.48.1565703547842; Tue, 13 Aug 2019 06:39:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2620:15c:6:12:9c46:e0da:efbf:69cc]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j6sm7924175pje.11.2019.08.13.06.39.06 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=AEAD-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 13 Aug 2019 06:39:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 09:39:05 -0400 From: Joel Fernandes To: Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@android.com, kbuild test robot , Josh Triplett , Lai Jiangshan , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Mathieu Desnoyers , "Paul E. McKenney" , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , rcu@vger.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] driver/core: Fix build error when SRCU and lockdep disabled Message-ID: <20190813133905.GA258732@google.com> References: <20190812214918.101756-1-joel@joelfernandes.org> <20190813060540.GE6670@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190813060540.GE6670@kroah.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-doc-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 08:05:40AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 05:49:17PM -0400, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote: > > Check if lockdep lock checking is disabled. If so, then do not define > > device_links_read_lock_held(). It is used only from places where lockdep > > checking is enabled. > > > > Also fix a bug where I was not checking dep_map. Previously, I did not > > test !SRCU configs so this got missed. Now it is sorted. > > > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/201908080026.WSAFx14k%25lkp@intel.com/ > > Fixes: c9e4d3a2fee8 ("acpi: Use built-in RCU list checking for acpi_ioremaps list") > > (Based on RCU's dev branch) > > > > Cc: kernel-team@android.com > > Cc: kbuild test robot , > > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , > > Cc: Josh Triplett , > > Cc: Lai Jiangshan , > > Cc: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, > > Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers , > > Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" , > > Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , > > Cc: rcu@vger.kernel.org, > > Cc: Steven Rostedt , > > > > Reported-by: kbuild test robot > > Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) > > Nit, drop those blank lines above, should all be in one big "block"> Ok. > > drivers/base/core.c | 4 +++- > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/base/core.c b/drivers/base/core.c > > index 32cf83d1c744..c22271577c84 100644 > > --- a/drivers/base/core.c > > +++ b/drivers/base/core.c > > @@ -97,10 +97,12 @@ void device_links_read_unlock(int not_used) > > up_read(&device_links_lock); > > } > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC > > int device_links_read_lock_held(void) > > { > > - return lock_is_held(&device_links_lock); > > + return lock_is_held(&(device_links_lock.dep_map)); > > } > > +#endif > > I don't know what the original code looks like here, but I'm guessing > that some .h file will need to be fixed up as you are just preventing > this function from ever being present without that option enabled? No, it doesn't. I already thought about that and it is not an issue. I know this may be confusing because the patch I am fixing is not yet in mainline but in -rcu dev branch, however I did CC you on that RCU patch before but understandably it is not in the series so it was harder to review. Let me explain, the lock checking facility that this patch uses is here: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-rcu.git/commit/?h=dev&id=28875945ba98d1b47a8a706812b6494d165bb0a0 If you see, the CONFIG_PROVE_RCU_LIST defines an alternate __list_check_rcu() which is just a NOOP if CONFIG_PROVE_RCU_LIST=n. CONFIG_PROVE_RCU_LIST depends on CONFIG_PROVE_RCU which is def_bool on CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING which selects CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC. So there cannot be a scenario where CONFIG_PROVE_RCU_LIST is enabled but CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC is disabled. To verify this, one could clone the RCU tree's dev branch and do this: Initially PROVE_RCU_LIST is not in config: joelaf@joelaf:~/repo/linux-master$ grep -i prove_rcu .config Neither is DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC: joelaf@joelaf:~/repo/linux-master$ grep -i debug_lock .config # CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC is not set Enable all configs: joelaf@joelaf:~/repo/linux-master$ ./scripts/config -e CONFIG_RCU_EXPERT joelaf@joelaf:~/repo/linux-master$ ./scripts/config -e CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING joelaf@joelaf:~/repo/linux-master$ ./scripts/config -e CONFIG_PROVE_RCU joelaf@joelaf:~/repo/linux-master$ ./scripts/config -e CONFIG_PROVE_RCU_LIST joelaf@joelaf:~/repo/linux-master$ make olddefconfig DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC shows up: joelaf@joelaf:~/repo/linux-master$ grep -i debug_lock_all .config CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC=y So does PROVE_RCU options: joelaf@joelaf:~/repo/linux-master$ grep -i prove_rcu .config CONFIG_PROVE_RCU=y CONFIG_PROVE_RCU_LIST=y Now, force disable DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC: joelaf@joelaf:~/repo/linux-master$ ./scripts/config -d CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC joelaf@joelaf:~/repo/linux-master$ make olddefconfig Options are still enabled: joelaf@joelaf:~/repo/linux-master$ grep -i debug_lock .config CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC=y joelaf@joelaf:~/repo/linux-master$ grep -i prove_rcu .config CONFIG_PROVE_RCU=y CONFIG_PROVE_RCU_LIST=y thanks, - Joel