From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>
Cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org, mingo@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 7/9] liblockdep: Support using LD_PRELOAD
Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 18:21:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130510162115.GB885@dyad.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <518D1B16.9080904@oracle.com>
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 12:06:46PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 05/10/2013 09:57 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > So you're doing instance tracking and not creating classes like the kernel
> > lockdep does? While that reduces false positives it also greatly reduces the
> > effectiveness of lockdep.
> >
> > The power of lock-classes is that it increases the chance of catching potential
> > deadlocks without there ever actually being a deadlock.
>
> Originally I had classes working as you've pointed out, until the first time I've
> tried running lockdep on qemu.
>
> They appear to have wrappers for every api call known to man, including all the
> posix locking apis.
>
> Basically, instead of directly calling pthread_mutex_lock() for example, there's
> a wrapper named qemu_mutex_lock() that calls the api above:
>
> void qemu_mutex_lock(QemuMutex *mutex)
> {
> int err;
>
> err = pthread_mutex_lock(&mutex->lock);
> if (err)
> error_exit(err, __func__);
> }
>
> So as you might imagine, the first time I ran it my log exploded with warnings.
>
> I've poked around the source of other big projects, and the example above is
> somewhat common with projects that wrap everything to be compatible with different
> architectures or apis - which is something that doesn't happen in the kernel.
Urgh.. yes that might be a problem. Still it is something that should at least
be clearly stated somewhere (the Changelog for one).
Not being able to do classes sucks though :/
Hmm, we could do something like:
$ LIBLOCKDEP_CLASS_DEPTH=n LD_PRELOAD=liblockdep.so my_app
where an @n of -1 would indicate per-instance classes and 0+ would be the
__builtin_return_address(n). That way, the above qemu thing should work with 1;
which should be the return address of the wrapper.
Of course, projects mixing different wrapper depths will be immense 'fun' :/
We could make it even worse and make the depth depend on the DSO name.. /me
runs like crazeh :-)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-10 16:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-09 15:58 [PATCH v3 0/9] liblockdep: userspace lockdep Sasha Levin
2013-05-09 15:58 ` [PATCH v3 1/9] lockdep: Be nice about building from userspace Sasha Levin
2013-05-09 15:58 ` [PATCH v3 2/9] liblockdep: Wrap kernel/lockdep.c to allow usage " Sasha Levin
2013-05-10 9:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-05-10 9:38 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-05-10 10:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-05-10 13:23 ` Sasha Levin
2013-05-10 14:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-05-10 14:11 ` Sasha Levin
2013-05-10 14:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-05-10 14:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-05-10 14:23 ` Sasha Levin
2013-05-10 13:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-05-09 15:58 ` [PATCH v3 3/9] liblockdep: Add public headers for pthread_mutex_t implementation Sasha Levin
2013-05-09 15:58 ` [PATCH v3 4/9] liblockdep: Add pthread_mutex_t test suite Sasha Levin
2013-05-09 15:58 ` [PATCH v3 5/9] liblockdep: Add public headers for pthread_rwlock_t implementation Sasha Levin
2013-05-09 15:58 ` [PATCH v3 6/9] liblockdep: Add pthread_rwlock_t test suite Sasha Levin
2013-05-09 15:58 ` [PATCH v3 7/9] liblockdep: Support using LD_PRELOAD Sasha Levin
2013-05-10 11:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-05-10 11:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-05-10 11:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-05-10 13:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-05-10 13:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-05-10 16:06 ` Sasha Levin
2013-05-10 16:21 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2013-05-10 16:42 ` Sasha Levin
2013-05-09 15:58 ` [PATCH v3 8/9] liblockdep: Add the 'lockdep' user-space utility Sasha Levin
2013-05-10 9:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-05-10 9:35 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-05-10 10:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-05-10 11:00 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-05-10 11:10 ` Borislav Petkov
2013-05-10 11:07 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-05-09 15:58 ` [PATCH v3 9/9] liblockdep: Add a MAINTAINERS entry Sasha Levin
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=20130510162115.GB885@dyad.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=sasha.levin@oracle.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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