From: peterz@infradead.org
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
tglx@linutronix.de, kent.overstreet@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lockdep: Do no validate wait context for novalidate class
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2020 13:40:36 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200820114036.GQ2674@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200629201529.1017485-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de>
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 10:15:29PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> The novalidate class is ignored in the lockchain validation but is
> considered in the wait context validation.
> If a mutex and a spinlock_t is ignored by using
> lockdep_set_novalidate_class() then both locks will share the same lock
> class. From the wait validation point of view the mutex will then appear
> like a spinlock_t and the validator will complain if another mutex will
> be acquired.
>
> Ignore the nonvalidate locks from wait context checking.
Hurmph.. but how? There was only a single user... /me greps.
drivers/base/core.c: lockdep_set_novalidate_class(&dev->mutex);
drivers/md/bcache/btree.c: lockdep_set_novalidate_class(&b->lock);
drivers/md/bcache/btree.c: lockdep_set_novalidate_class(&b->write_lock);
Urgh.. there's more now :-(
So write_lock, like dev->mutex is a mutex.
Kent, what's the story with b->lock? It appears to have lockdep
annotations, but then is also the novalidate class. Also neither of
these lockdep_set_novalidate_class() thingies have a comment.
Anyway, all 3 users should have the same wait context, so where is the
actual problem?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-20 11:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-29 20:15 [PATCH] lockdep: Do no validate wait context for novalidate class Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-08-20 9:05 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-08-20 11:40 ` peterz [this message]
2020-08-20 11:43 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-08-20 12:38 ` peterz
2020-08-20 14:05 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
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=20200820114036.GQ2674@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=kent.overstreet@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=will@kernel.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