public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se>
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>,
	Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
	Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@gmail.com>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
	Vignesh R <vigneshr@ti.com>, Yong Li <yong.b.li@intel.com>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	linux-i2c <linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-gpio <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] gpio: fix an incorrect lockdep warning
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 11:03:58 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160919090358.GU5016@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <88940f9a-79bf-6c88-8e1d-f76f32dda04a@axentia.se>

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 10:48:44AM +0200, Peter Rosin wrote:
> On 2016-09-19 10:14, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 10:01:49AM +0200, Peter Rosin wrote:
> >> Or, do what the i2c-mux code is doing and use an rt_mutex instead
> >> of an ordinary mutex. That way you are very sure to not get any
> >> lockdep splat ... at all. Ok, sorry, that was not a serious
> >> suggestion, but it would be a tad bit simpler to implement...
> > 
> > So I find it weird that people use rt_mutex as a locking primitive,
> > since its only that one lock that then does PI and all the other locks
> > that are related still create inversions.
> 
> So, someone took the bait :-)
> 
> Yes, I too find it weird, and would like to get rid of it. It's just
> odd. It's been some years since the start though, waaay before me
> entering kernel space.
> 
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=194684e596af4b
> 
> 
> But it's hard to argue with the numbers given in the discussion:
> 
> http://linux-i2c.vger.kernel.narkive.com/nokldJcc/patch-1-1-i2c-prevent-priority-inversion-on-top-of-bus-lock
> 
> Has anything happened to the regular mutex implementation that might
> have changed the picture? *crosses fingers*

Use the -RT kernel and all locks will end up as rt_mutex. Avoiding
inversion on one specific lock, while there are then a gazillion other
than can equally create inversion doesn't make sense to me.

  reply	other threads:[~2016-09-19  9:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-09-16 16:02 [PATCH v2 0/4] gpio: fix an incorrect lockdep warning Bartosz Golaszewski
2016-09-16 16:02 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] i2c: export i2c_adapter_depth() Bartosz Golaszewski
2016-09-16 16:02 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] lockdep: make MAX_LOCKDEP_SUBCLASSES unconditionally visible Bartosz Golaszewski
2016-09-16 16:02 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] i2c: add a warning to i2c_adapter_depth() Bartosz Golaszewski
2016-09-16 16:02 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] gpio: pca953x: fix an incorrect lockdep warning Bartosz Golaszewski
2016-09-21  5:45   ` Wolfram Sang
2016-09-23  8:10     ` Linus Walleij
2016-09-24  8:55       ` Wolfram Sang
2016-09-24  9:15   ` Wolfram Sang
2016-09-24 14:26     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2016-09-16 17:26 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] gpio: " Wolfram Sang
2016-09-16 17:45   ` Peter Rosin
2016-09-16 17:58     ` Wolfram Sang
2016-09-18  8:52       ` Peter Rosin
2016-09-18 19:43         ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2016-09-18 19:45           ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2016-09-19  8:01             ` Peter Rosin
2016-09-19  8:14               ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-19  8:48                 ` Peter Rosin
2016-09-19  9:03                   ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2016-09-20  8:48                     ` Peter Rosin
2016-09-20 10:07                       ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2016-09-20 10:28                         ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-20 10:48                         ` Peter Rosin
2016-09-20 11:30                           ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2016-09-20 12:32                             ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2016-09-20 15:33                       ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-09-21  9:47                         ` Peter Rosin
2016-09-17  1:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-17 10:18   ` Wolfram Sang
2016-09-17 18:59     ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2016-09-24  8:56 ` Wolfram Sang

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=20160919090358.GU5016@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=bgolaszewski@baylibre.com \
    --cc=geert+renesas@glider.be \
    --cc=gnurou@gmail.com \
    --cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peda@axentia.se \
    --cc=vigneshr@ti.com \
    --cc=wsa@the-dreams.de \
    --cc=yong.b.li@intel.com \
    /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