From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: [RFC PATCH 03/19] lockdep: sanitize reclaim bit names
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 18:37:04 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090122174052.262128471@chello.nl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20090122173701.674448070@chello.nl
[-- Attachment #1: lockdep-generate2.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 6753 bytes --]
s/HELD_OVER/ENABLED/g
so that its similar to the hard and soft-irq names.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
---
include/linux/lockdep.h | 8 ++++----
kernel/lockdep.c | 38 +++++++++++++++++++-------------------
2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/lockdep.h
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/include/linux/lockdep.h
+++ linux-2.6/include/linux/lockdep.h
@@ -30,13 +30,13 @@ enum lock_usage_bit
LOCK_USED_IN_RECLAIM_FS,
LOCK_ENABLED_SOFTIRQ,
LOCK_ENABLED_HARDIRQ,
- LOCK_HELD_OVER_RECLAIM_FS,
+ LOCK_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS,
LOCK_USED_IN_HARDIRQ_READ,
LOCK_USED_IN_SOFTIRQ_READ,
LOCK_USED_IN_RECLAIM_FS_READ,
LOCK_ENABLED_SOFTIRQ_READ,
LOCK_ENABLED_HARDIRQ_READ,
- LOCK_HELD_OVER_RECLAIM_FS_READ,
+ LOCK_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS_READ,
LOCK_USAGE_STATES
};
@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ enum lock_usage_bit
#define LOCKF_USED_IN_RECLAIM_FS (1 << LOCK_USED_IN_RECLAIM_FS)
#define LOCKF_ENABLED_HARDIRQ (1 << LOCK_ENABLED_HARDIRQ)
#define LOCKF_ENABLED_SOFTIRQ (1 << LOCK_ENABLED_SOFTIRQ)
-#define LOCKF_HELD_OVER_RECLAIM_FS (1 << LOCK_HELD_OVER_RECLAIM_FS)
+#define LOCKF_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS (1 << LOCK_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS)
#define LOCKF_ENABLED_IRQ (LOCKF_ENABLED_HARDIRQ | LOCKF_ENABLED_SOFTIRQ)
#define LOCKF_USED_IN_IRQ (LOCKF_USED_IN_HARDIRQ | LOCKF_USED_IN_SOFTIRQ)
@@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ enum lock_usage_bit
#define LOCKF_USED_IN_RECLAIM_FS_READ (1 << LOCK_USED_IN_RECLAIM_FS_READ)
#define LOCKF_ENABLED_HARDIRQ_READ (1 << LOCK_ENABLED_HARDIRQ_READ)
#define LOCKF_ENABLED_SOFTIRQ_READ (1 << LOCK_ENABLED_SOFTIRQ_READ)
-#define LOCKF_HELD_OVER_RECLAIM_FS_READ (1 << LOCK_HELD_OVER_RECLAIM_FS_READ)
+#define LOCKF_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS_READ (1 << LOCK_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS_READ)
#define LOCKF_ENABLED_IRQ_READ \
(LOCKF_ENABLED_HARDIRQ_READ | LOCKF_ENABLED_SOFTIRQ_READ)
Index: linux-2.6/kernel/lockdep.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/lockdep.c
+++ linux-2.6/kernel/lockdep.c
@@ -458,8 +458,8 @@ static const char *usage_str[] =
[LOCK_ENABLED_HARDIRQ_READ] = "hardirq-on-R",
[LOCK_USED_IN_RECLAIM_FS] = "in-reclaim-W",
[LOCK_USED_IN_RECLAIM_FS_READ] = "in-reclaim-R",
- [LOCK_HELD_OVER_RECLAIM_FS] = "ov-reclaim-W",
- [LOCK_HELD_OVER_RECLAIM_FS_READ] = "ov-reclaim-R",
+ [LOCK_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS] = "ov-reclaim-W",
+ [LOCK_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS_READ] = "ov-reclaim-R",
};
const char * __get_key_name(struct lockdep_subclass_key *key, char *str)
@@ -504,14 +504,14 @@ get_usage_chars(struct lock_class *class
if (class->usage_mask & LOCKF_USED_IN_RECLAIM_FS)
*c5 = '+';
else
- if (class->usage_mask & LOCKF_HELD_OVER_RECLAIM_FS)
+ if (class->usage_mask & LOCKF_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS)
*c5 = '-';
- if (class->usage_mask & LOCKF_HELD_OVER_RECLAIM_FS_READ)
+ if (class->usage_mask & LOCKF_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS_READ)
*c6 = '-';
if (class->usage_mask & LOCKF_USED_IN_RECLAIM_FS_READ) {
*c6 = '+';
- if (class->usage_mask & LOCKF_HELD_OVER_RECLAIM_FS_READ)
+ if (class->usage_mask & LOCKF_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS_READ)
*c6 = '?';
}
@@ -1335,7 +1335,7 @@ check_prev_add_irq(struct task_struct *c
* forwards-subgraph starting at <next>:
*/
if (!check_usage(curr, prev, next, LOCK_USED_IN_RECLAIM_FS,
- LOCK_HELD_OVER_RECLAIM_FS, "reclaim-fs"))
+ LOCK_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS, "reclaim-fs"))
return 0;
/*
@@ -1345,7 +1345,7 @@ check_prev_add_irq(struct task_struct *c
* forwards-subgraph starting at <next>:
*/
if (!check_usage(curr, prev, next, LOCK_USED_IN_RECLAIM_FS_READ,
- LOCK_HELD_OVER_RECLAIM_FS, "reclaim-fs-read"))
+ LOCK_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS, "reclaim-fs-read"))
return 0;
return 1;
@@ -2058,17 +2058,17 @@ static int mark_lock_irq(struct task_str
ret = 2;
break;
case LOCK_USED_IN_RECLAIM_FS:
- if (!valid_state(curr, this, new_bit, LOCK_HELD_OVER_RECLAIM_FS))
+ if (!valid_state(curr, this, new_bit, LOCK_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS))
return 0;
if (!valid_state(curr, this, new_bit,
- LOCK_HELD_OVER_RECLAIM_FS_READ))
+ LOCK_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS_READ))
return 0;
/*
* just marked it reclaim-fs-safe, check that this lock
* took no reclaim-fs-unsafe lock in the past:
*/
if (!check_usage_forwards(curr, this,
- LOCK_HELD_OVER_RECLAIM_FS, "reclaim-fs"))
+ LOCK_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS, "reclaim-fs"))
return 0;
#if STRICT_READ_CHECKS
/*
@@ -2076,7 +2076,7 @@ static int mark_lock_irq(struct task_str
* took no reclaim-fs-unsafe-read lock in the past:
*/
if (!check_usage_forwards(curr, this,
- LOCK_HELD_OVER_RECLAIM_FS_READ, "reclaim-fs-read"))
+ LOCK_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS_READ, "reclaim-fs-read"))
return 0;
#endif
if (reclaim_verbose(hlock_class(this)))
@@ -2109,14 +2109,14 @@ static int mark_lock_irq(struct task_str
ret = 2;
break;
case LOCK_USED_IN_RECLAIM_FS_READ:
- if (!valid_state(curr, this, new_bit, LOCK_HELD_OVER_RECLAIM_FS))
+ if (!valid_state(curr, this, new_bit, LOCK_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS))
return 0;
/*
* just marked it reclaim-fs-read-safe, check that this lock
* took no reclaim-fs-unsafe lock in the past:
*/
if (!check_usage_forwards(curr, this,
- LOCK_HELD_OVER_RECLAIM_FS, "reclaim-fs"))
+ LOCK_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS, "reclaim-fs"))
return 0;
if (reclaim_verbose(hlock_class(this)))
ret = 2;
@@ -2173,7 +2173,7 @@ static int mark_lock_irq(struct task_str
if (softirq_verbose(hlock_class(this)))
ret = 2;
break;
- case LOCK_HELD_OVER_RECLAIM_FS:
+ case LOCK_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS:
if (!valid_state(curr, this, new_bit, LOCK_USED_IN_RECLAIM_FS))
return 0;
if (!valid_state(curr, this, new_bit,
@@ -2229,7 +2229,7 @@ static int mark_lock_irq(struct task_str
if (softirq_verbose(hlock_class(this)))
ret = 2;
break;
- case LOCK_HELD_OVER_RECLAIM_FS_READ:
+ case LOCK_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS_READ:
if (!valid_state(curr, this, new_bit, LOCK_USED_IN_RECLAIM_FS))
return 0;
#if STRICT_READ_CHECKS
@@ -2288,9 +2288,9 @@ mark_held_locks(struct task_struct *curr
case RECLAIM_FS:
if (hlock->read)
- usage_bit = LOCK_HELD_OVER_RECLAIM_FS_READ;
+ usage_bit = LOCK_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS_READ;
else
- usage_bit = LOCK_HELD_OVER_RECLAIM_FS;
+ usage_bit = LOCK_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS;
break;
default:
@@ -2641,8 +2641,8 @@ static int mark_lock(struct task_struct
case LOCK_ENABLED_SOFTIRQ_READ:
case LOCK_USED_IN_RECLAIM_FS:
case LOCK_USED_IN_RECLAIM_FS_READ:
- case LOCK_HELD_OVER_RECLAIM_FS:
- case LOCK_HELD_OVER_RECLAIM_FS_READ:
+ case LOCK_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS:
+ case LOCK_ENABLED_RECLAIM_FS_READ:
ret = mark_lock_irq(curr, this, new_bit);
if (!ret)
return 0;
--
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-22 17:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-22 17:37 [RFC PATCH 00/19] lockdep series Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 01/19] lockdep: annotate reclaim context (__GFP_NOFS) Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 19:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 20:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-23 7:33 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-23 8:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-23 15:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 02/19] lockdep: sanitize bit names Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 04/19] lockdep: lockdep_states.h Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 05/19] lockdep: simplify mark_held_locks Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 06/19] lockdep: simplify mark_lock() Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 07/19] lockdep: move state bit definitions around Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 08/19] lockdep: generate the state bit definitions Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 09/19] lockdep: generate usage strings Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 10/19] lockdep: split up mark_lock_irq() Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 11/19] lockdep: simplify the mark_lock_irq() helpers Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 12/19] lockdep: further simplify " Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 13/19] simplify mark_lock_irq() helpers #3 Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 14/19] lockdep: merge the _READ mark_lock_irq() helpers Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 15/19] lockdep: merge the !_READ " Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 16/19] lockdep: fully reduce mark_lock_irq() Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 17/19] lockdep: simplify get_user_chars() Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 18/19] lockdep: get_user_chars() redo Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-22 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 19/19] lockdep: simplify check_prev_add_irq() Peter Zijlstra
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=20090122174052.262128471@chello.nl \
--to=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=npiggin@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