Re: [PATCH v4] lib/spinlock_debug.c: prevent a recursive cycle in the debug code

[Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>]

On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 03:08:19PM -0800, Peter Hurley wrote:
> The problem is you have postulated a very shallow recursion.
> This looks much worse if this happens 1000 times, and
> probably won't recover to output anything.
> 
> Additionally, what if the console_sem is simply corrupted?
> A livelock with no output ever is not very helpful.
> 
> As I wrote earlier, I don't think this is the way to fix
> recursion problems with printk() [by eliding output].

I think you are currently misunderstading about this patch. Or I'm
misunderstanding you.. The patch was changed in v4 so that it can print
a debug message even in the recursive cycle case, at the first time.

I also thought printing nothing in the case was not helpful at all which I
did in v1,2,3. But it's changed in v4, that is, this patch.

thanks,
byungchul

> 
> Rather, a way to effectively determine a recursion is in progress,
> and _at a minimum_ guaranteeing that the recursive output will
> eventually be output should be the goal.
> 
> Including dumb recursion like a console driver printing
> an error :/
> 
> Then, lockdep could remain enabled while calling console drivers.
> 
> Regards,
> Peter Hurley
> 
> >            sem->count--
> >           spin_unlock()   << unlock, return
> >        arch_spin_lock()   << got the lock, return
> >       sem->count--
> >       spin_unlock() << unlock, return
> >    arch_spin_lock() << got the lock, return
> >   sem->count--
> >   spin_unlock() << unlock, return
> > 
> > 
> > ...um
> > 
> > 
> >> But I found there's a possiblity in the debug code *itself* to cause a
> >> lockup.
> > 
> > please explain.
> > 
> > 	-ss
> >