public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Linux filesystem caching discussion list 
	<linux-cachefs@redhat.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>, oleg <oleg@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Incorrect circular locking dependency?
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 18:08:52 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1249402132.4762.9.camel@laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <18723.1249401004@redhat.com>

On Tue, 2009-08-04 at 16:50 +0100, David Howells wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> 
> > Creating a new class for your second workqueue might help,
> 
> I only have one workqueue.  The problem is there are two waitqueues, but
> init_waitqueue_head() always sets q->lock to the same class.

Ah, right, I read it backwards then.

> > we'd have to pass a second key through __create_workqueue_key() and pass
> > that into init_cpu_workqueue() and apply it to cwq->lock using
> > lockdep_set_class() and co.
> 
> Actually, wouldn't just making init_cpu_workqueue() apply a class to
> cwq->more_work that's common to all workqueues suffice? 

That's the default behaviour.

>  Or even, have
> init_waitqueue_head() apply an alternate class to q->lock?

Right, that would work. Something akin to all the other per instance
classes would do I guess.


Utterly untested..

---
 include/linux/wait.h |    9 ++++++++-
 kernel/wait.c        |    5 +++--
 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/wait.h b/include/linux/wait.h
index 6788e1a..cf3c2f5 100644
--- a/include/linux/wait.h
+++ b/include/linux/wait.h
@@ -77,7 +77,14 @@ struct task_struct;
 #define __WAIT_BIT_KEY_INITIALIZER(word, bit)				\
 	{ .flags = word, .bit_nr = bit, }
 
-extern void init_waitqueue_head(wait_queue_head_t *q);
+extern void __init_waitqueue_head(wait_queue_head_t *q, struct lock_class_key *);
+
+#define init_waitqueue_head(q)				\
+	do {						\
+		static struct lock_class_key __key;	\
+							\
+		__init_waitqueue_head((q), &__key);	\
+	} while (0)
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_LOCKDEP
 # define __WAIT_QUEUE_HEAD_INIT_ONSTACK(name) \
diff --git a/kernel/wait.c b/kernel/wait.c
index ea7c3b4..c4bd3d8 100644
--- a/kernel/wait.c
+++ b/kernel/wait.c
@@ -10,13 +10,14 @@
 #include <linux/wait.h>
 #include <linux/hash.h>
 
-void init_waitqueue_head(wait_queue_head_t *q)
+void __init_waitqueue_head(wait_queue_head_t *q, struct lock_class_key *key)
 {
 	spin_lock_init(&q->lock);
+	lockdep_set_class(&q->lock, key);
 	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&q->task_list);
 }
 
-EXPORT_SYMBOL(init_waitqueue_head);
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(__init_waitqueue_head);
 
 void add_wait_queue(wait_queue_head_t *q, wait_queue_t *wait)
 {



  reply	other threads:[~2009-08-04 16:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-06-22  2:37 CacheFiles: Readpage failed on backing file Christian Kujau
2009-06-22  8:58 ` [Linux-cachefs] " David Howells
2009-06-22 14:54   ` Takashi Iwai
2009-06-22 15:21     ` David Howells
2009-06-22 15:45       ` Takashi Iwai
2009-07-07  7:21     ` Takashi Iwai
2009-07-07 13:00       ` David Howells
2009-07-07 13:05         ` Takashi Iwai
2009-07-27 14:37     ` Incorrect circular locking dependency? David Howells
2009-08-04 14:51       ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-04 15:50         ` David Howells
2009-08-04 16:08           ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2009-08-04 15:59         ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-08-04 17:23     ` [Linux-cachefs] CacheFiles: Readpage failed on backing file David Howells
2009-08-05 10:00       ` Takashi Iwai
2009-08-07 12:07       ` Takashi Iwai
2009-08-07 14:26         ` David Howells
2009-06-23  0:36   ` Christian Kujau
2009-06-23  7:49     ` Christian Kujau

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=1249402132.4762.9.camel@laptop \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
    --cc=linux-cachefs@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=tiwai@suse.de \
    /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