public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	torvalds@osdl.org, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: R/W semaphore changes
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2006 15:21:35 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060704132135.GA7816@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <15345.1152018339@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com>


* David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> wrote:

> They still aren't allowed to.  Consider:
> 
> 	CPU 1			CPU 2
> 	=======================	=======================
> 	-->down_read(&A);
> 	<--down_read(&A);
> 				-->down_write(&A);
> 				   --- SLEEPING ---
> 	-->down_read(&A);
> 	   --- DEADLOCKED ---

i think you misunderstood what nested locking means in the lockdep case. 
(and that is my fault, for not adding enough documentation to 
down_write_nested() and down_read_nested().)

nested locking does not mean the same instance is allowed to nest! It 
only allows different-instance nesting, 'nesting within the same lock 
class'. (Lockdep has a very broad notion of 'lock class', to achieve the 
collection of very generic locking rules and to do as generic validation 
as possible. See Documentation/lockdep-design.txt for more details.)

Rw-locks on the other hand have special permission to nest for the same 
instance too. See commit 6c9076ec9cd448f43bbda871352a7067f456ee26:

    lockdep so far only allowed read-recursion for the same lock instance.
    This is enough in the overwhelming majority of cases, but a hostap case
    triggered and reported by Miles Lane relies on same-class
    different-instance recursion.  So we relax the restriction on read-lock
    recursion.

    (This change does not allow rwsem read-recursion, which is still
    forbidden.)

also please see the testcases in lib/locking-selftest.c, we specifically 
test the rwsem scenario you outlined above, to make sure the validator 
immediately flags it:

------------------------
| Locking API testsuite:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 | spin |wlock |rlock |mutex | wsem | rsem |
  --------------------------------------------------------------------------
[...]
              recursive read-lock:             |  ok  |             |  ok  |
           recursive read-lock #2:             |  ok  |             |  ok  |
[...]

	Ingo

  parent reply	other threads:[~2006-07-04 13:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-07-04 12:47 R/W semaphore changes David Howells
2006-07-04 12:52 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-07-04 13:05   ` David Howells
2006-07-04 13:17     ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-07-04 13:21     ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2006-07-04 13:33       ` [patch] lockdep: add more rwsem.h documentation Ingo Molnar

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=20060704132135.GA7816@elte.hu \
    --to=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=arjan@infradead.org \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.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