From: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>,
"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
rostedt@goodmis.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] lglock: update lockdep annotations to report recursive local locks
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2013 18:17:25 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1362449845-7492-3-git-send-email-walken@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1362449845-7492-1-git-send-email-walken@google.com>
Oleg Nesterov recently noticed that the lockdep annotations in lglock.c
are not sufficient to detect some obvious deadlocks, such as
lg_local_lock(LOCK) + lg_local_lock(LOCK) or
spin_lock(X) + lg_local_lock(Y) vs lg_local_lock(Y) + spin_lock(X).
Both issues are easily fixed by indicating to lockdep that lglock's local
locks are not recursive. We shouldn't use the rwlock acquire/release
functions here, as lglock doesn't share the same semantics. Instead
we can base our lockdep annotations on the lock_acquire_shared
(for local lglock) and lock_acquire_exclusive (for global lglock)
helpers.
I am not proposing new lglock specific helpers as I don't see the point
of the existing second level of helpers :)
Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
---
kernel/lglock.c | 12 ++++++------
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/lglock.c b/kernel/lglock.c
index 6535a667a5a7..86ae2aebf004 100644
--- a/kernel/lglock.c
+++ b/kernel/lglock.c
@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ void lg_local_lock(struct lglock *lg)
arch_spinlock_t *lock;
preempt_disable();
- rwlock_acquire_read(&lg->lock_dep_map, 0, 0, _RET_IP_);
+ lock_acquire_shared(&lg->lock_dep_map, 0, 0, NULL, _RET_IP_);
lock = this_cpu_ptr(lg->lock);
arch_spin_lock(lock);
}
@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ void lg_local_unlock(struct lglock *lg)
{
arch_spinlock_t *lock;
- rwlock_release(&lg->lock_dep_map, 1, _RET_IP_);
+ lock_release(&lg->lock_dep_map, 1, _RET_IP_);
lock = this_cpu_ptr(lg->lock);
arch_spin_unlock(lock);
preempt_enable();
@@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ void lg_local_lock_cpu(struct lglock *lg, int cpu)
arch_spinlock_t *lock;
preempt_disable();
- rwlock_acquire_read(&lg->lock_dep_map, 0, 0, _RET_IP_);
+ lock_acquire_shared(&lg->lock_dep_map, 0, 0, NULL, _RET_IP_);
lock = per_cpu_ptr(lg->lock, cpu);
arch_spin_lock(lock);
}
@@ -53,7 +53,7 @@ void lg_local_unlock_cpu(struct lglock *lg, int cpu)
{
arch_spinlock_t *lock;
- rwlock_release(&lg->lock_dep_map, 1, _RET_IP_);
+ lock_release(&lg->lock_dep_map, 1, _RET_IP_);
lock = per_cpu_ptr(lg->lock, cpu);
arch_spin_unlock(lock);
preempt_enable();
@@ -65,7 +65,7 @@ void lg_global_lock(struct lglock *lg)
int i;
preempt_disable();
- rwlock_acquire(&lg->lock_dep_map, 0, 0, _RET_IP_);
+ lock_acquire_exclusive(&lg->lock_dep_map, 0, 0, NULL, _RET_IP_);
for_each_possible_cpu(i) {
arch_spinlock_t *lock;
lock = per_cpu_ptr(lg->lock, i);
@@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ void lg_global_unlock(struct lglock *lg)
{
int i;
- rwlock_release(&lg->lock_dep_map, 1, _RET_IP_);
+ lock_release(&lg->lock_dep_map, 1, _RET_IP_);
for_each_possible_cpu(i) {
arch_spinlock_t *lock;
lock = per_cpu_ptr(lg->lock, i);
--
1.8.1.3
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-05 2:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-05 2:17 [PATCH 0/2] tighten lglock lockdep annotations Michel Lespinasse
2013-03-05 2:17 ` [PATCH 1/2] lockdep: introduce lock_acquire_exclusive/shared helper macros Michel Lespinasse
2013-03-05 15:19 ` Lai Jiangshan
2013-03-05 15:40 ` Michel Lespinasse
2013-03-05 17:06 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-03-05 2:17 ` Michel Lespinasse [this message]
2013-03-05 17:42 ` [PATCH 2/2] lglock: update lockdep annotations to report recursive local locks Oleg Nesterov
2013-03-05 18:24 ` Michel Lespinasse
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=1362449845-7492-3-git-send-email-walken@google.com \
--to=walken@google.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.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