From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@o2.pl>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Jiri Kosina <jikos@jikos.cz>,
Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] lockdep: spin_lock_irqsave_nested()
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 14:12:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061030131241.GA1657@ff.dom.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1162199005.24143.169.camel@taijtu>
Here are some doubts...
Jarek P.
On 30-10-2006 10:03, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
> Subject: spin_lock_irqsave_nested()
>
> Introduce spin_lock_irqsave_nested(); implementation from:
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/6/1/122
> Patch from:
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/9/13/258
>
> Signed-off-by: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jiri Kosina <jikos@jikos.cz>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
> ---
> include/linux/spinlock.h | 5 +++++
> include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h | 2 ++
> include/linux/spinlock_api_up.h | 1 +
> kernel/spinlock.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
> 4 files changed, 29 insertions(+)
>
> Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h
> +++ linux-2.6/include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h
> @@ -32,6 +32,8 @@ void __lockfunc _read_lock_irq(rwlock_t
> void __lockfunc _write_lock_irq(rwlock_t *lock) __acquires(lock);
> unsigned long __lockfunc _spin_lock_irqsave(spinlock_t *lock)
> __acquires(lock);
> +unsigned long __lockfunc _spin_lock_irqsave_nested(spinlock_t *lock, int subclass)
> + __acquires(spinlock_t);
According to neighbours rather:
+ __acquires(lock);
> unsigned long __lockfunc _read_lock_irqsave(rwlock_t *lock)
> __acquires(lock);
> unsigned long __lockfunc _write_lock_irqsave(rwlock_t *lock)
> Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/spinlock_api_up.h
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/include/linux/spinlock_api_up.h
> +++ linux-2.6/include/linux/spinlock_api_up.h
> @@ -59,6 +59,7 @@
> #define _read_lock_irq(lock) __LOCK_IRQ(lock)
> #define _write_lock_irq(lock) __LOCK_IRQ(lock)
> #define _spin_lock_irqsave(lock, flags) __LOCK_IRQSAVE(lock, flags)
> +#define _spin_lock_irqsave_nested(lock, flags, subclass) __LOCK_IRQSAVE(lock, flags, subclass)
Is __LOCK_IRQSAVE() with 3 args defined?
> #define _read_lock_irqsave(lock, flags) __LOCK_IRQSAVE(lock, flags)
> #define _write_lock_irqsave(lock, flags) __LOCK_IRQSAVE(lock, flags)
> #define _spin_trylock(lock) ({ __LOCK(lock); 1; })
> Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/spinlock.h
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/include/linux/spinlock.h
> +++ linux-2.6/include/linux/spinlock.h
> @@ -186,6 +186,11 @@ do { \
> #define spin_lock_irqsave(lock, flags) flags = _spin_lock_irqsave(lock)
> #define read_lock_irqsave(lock, flags) flags = _read_lock_irqsave(lock)
> #define write_lock_irqsave(lock, flags) flags = _write_lock_irqsave(lock)
> +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC
> +#define spin_lock_irqsave_nested(lock, flags, subclass) flags = _spin_lock_irqsave_nested(lock, subclass)
> +#else
> +#define spin_lock_irqsave_nested(lock, flags, subclass) flags = _spin_lock_irqsave(lock)
> +#endif
> #else
Plus for api_up:
+#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC
+#define spin_lock_irqsave_nested(lock, flags, subclass) _spin_lock_irqsave_nested(lock, flags, subclass)
+#else
+#define spin_lock_irqsave_nested(lock, flags, subclass) _spin_lock_irqsave(lock, flags)
+#endif
> #define spin_lock_irqsave(lock, flags) _spin_lock_irqsave(lock, flags)
> #define read_lock_irqsave(lock, flags) _read_lock_irqsave(lock, flags)
> Index: linux-2.6/kernel/spinlock.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/spinlock.c
> +++ linux-2.6/kernel/spinlock.c
> @@ -293,6 +293,27 @@ void __lockfunc _spin_lock_nested(spinlo
> }
>
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(_spin_lock_nested);
> +unsigned long __lockfunc _spin_lock_irqsave_nested(spinlock_t *lock, int subclass)
> +{
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + local_irq_save(flags);
> + preempt_disable();
> + spin_acquire(&lock->dep_map, subclass, 0, _RET_IP_);
> + /*
> + * On lockdep we dont want the hand-coded irq-enable of
> + * _raw_spin_lock_flags() code, because lockdep assumes
> + * that interrupts are not re-enabled during lock-acquire:
> + */
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_SPIN_LOCKING
> + _raw_spin_lock(lock);
> +#else
> + _raw_spin_lock_flags(lock, &flags);
> +#endif
> + return flags;
> +}
> +
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(_spin_lock_irqsave_nested);
>
> #endif
>
>
Shouldn't this _nested locks be considered in:
#else /* CONFIG_PREEMPT: */
part?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-10-30 13:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-10-30 9:03 [PATCH 1/2] lockdep: spin_lock_irqsave_nested() Peter Zijlstra
2006-10-30 9:06 ` [PATCH 2/2] lockdep: annotate bcsp driver Peter Zijlstra
2006-10-30 9:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-10-30 9:30 ` Marcel Holtmann
2006-10-30 9:31 ` [PATCH 2/2] lockdep: annotate bcsp driver - v2 Peter Zijlstra
2006-10-30 9:07 ` [PATCH 1/2] lockdep: spin_lock_irqsave_nested() Ingo Molnar
2006-10-30 13:12 ` Jarek Poplawski [this message]
2006-10-30 13:27 ` Jarek Poplawski
2006-10-30 13:40 ` [PATCH 1/2] lockdep: spin_lock_irqsave_nested() -v2 Peter Zijlstra
2006-10-30 14:12 ` Jarek Poplawski
2006-10-31 6:48 ` [PATCH 1/2] lockdep: spin_lock_irqsave_nested() Andrew Morton
2006-10-31 7:25 ` [PATCH] splice : two smp_mb() can be omitted Eric Dumazet
2006-10-31 7:32 ` Jens Axboe
2006-10-31 7:41 ` Eric Dumazet
2006-10-31 7:46 ` Jens Axboe
2006-10-31 9:40 ` Nick Piggin
2006-10-31 9:49 ` Jens Axboe
2006-10-31 10:51 ` Eric Dumazet
2006-10-31 22:16 ` Nick Piggin
2006-10-31 23:08 ` Eric Dumazet
2006-10-31 23:45 ` Nick Piggin
2006-11-02 17:02 ` [PATCH] splice : Must fully check for fifos Eric Dumazet
2006-11-02 17:05 ` Eric Dumazet
2006-11-02 19:07 ` Jens Axboe
2006-11-03 8:50 ` Jens Axboe
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=20061030131241.GA1657@ff.dom.local \
--to=jarkao2@o2.pl \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=jikos@jikos.cz \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marcel@holtmann.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/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