From: nayeem <itachi.opsrc@gmail.com>
To: "Dilger, Andreas" <andreas.dilger@intel.com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: "devel@driverdev.osuosl.org" <devel@driverdev.osuosl.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Drokin, Oleg" <oleg.drokin@intel.com>,
James Simmons <jsimmons@infradead.org>,
Lustre Development List <lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: lustre/ldlm: Fixed sparse warnings
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 00:03:44 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <57DAE988.6040609@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47AECAA7-59D7-41DB-9A85-A23ACF6A7B1F@intel.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3133 bytes --]
On Wednesday 14 September 2016 10:44 AM, Dilger, Andreas wrote:
> On Sep 12, 2016, at 04:27, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 08:50:35PM +0530, Nayeemahmed Badebade wrote:
>>> Added __acquires / __releases sparse locking annotations
>>> to lock_res_and_lock and unlock_res_and_lock functions in
>>> l_lock.c, to fix below sparse warnings:
>>>
>>> l_lock.c:47:22: warning: context imbalance in 'lock_res_and_lock' - wrong count at exit
>>> l_lock.c:62:6: warning: context imbalance in 'unlock_res_and_lock' - unexpected unlock
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Nayeemahmed Badebade <itachi.opsrc@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/l_lock.c | 4 ++++
>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/l_lock.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/l_lock.c
>>> index ea8840c..c4b9612 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/l_lock.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/l_lock.c
>>> @@ -45,6 +45,8 @@
>>> * being an atomic operation.
>>> */
>>> struct ldlm_resource *lock_res_and_lock(struct ldlm_lock *lock)
>>> + __acquires(&lock->l_lock)
>>> + __acquires(lock->l_resource)
>>
>> Hm, these are tricky, I don't want to take this type of change without
>> an ack from the lustre developers...
>
> The "__acquires(&lock->l_lock)" line here looks correct, along with the
> corresponding "__releases(&lock->l_lock)" at unlock_res_and_lock().
>
> The problem, however, is that "l_resource" is not a lock, but rather a
> struct. The call to "lock_res(lock->l_resource)" is actually locking
> "lr_lock" internally.
>
> It would be better to add "__acquires(&res->lr_lock)" at lock_res() and
> "__releases(&res->lr_lock)" at unlock_res(). That will also forestall
> any other warnings about an imbalance with lock_res()/unlock_res() or
> their callsites.
>
> Cheers, Andreas
>
Hi Andreas,
Thank you for your review comments. I did the change according to your
comments and the diff is attached to mail. But this change doesn't seem
to fix the sparse warning.
With this change when i compile the code "make C=2
./drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/", sparse warning still comes:
{{{
CHECK drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/../../lustre/ldlm/l_lock.c
drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/../../lustre/ldlm/l_lock.c:47:22:
warning: context imbalance in 'lock_res_and_lock' - wrong count at exit
drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/../../lustre/ldlm/l_lock.c:62:6:
warning: context imbalance in 'unlock_res_and_lock' - unexpected unlock
CC [M] drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/../../lustre/ldlm/l_lock.o
}}}
Would it be a good idea to add "__acquires(&lock->l_resource->lr_lock)"
& "__acquires(&lock->l_lock)" at lock_res_and_lock() and
"__releases(&lock->l_resource->lr_lock)" & "__releases(&lock->l_lock)"
at unlock_res_and_lock() ?
Because with that change the sparse warning is fixed.
{{{
CHECK drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/../../lustre/ldlm/l_lock.c
CC [M] drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/../../lustre/ldlm/l_lock.o
}}}
Could you please confirm this.
Regards,
Nayeem
[-- Attachment #2: sparse-warnings-fix-patch-v2.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 1401 bytes --]
diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre_dlm.h b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre_dlm.h
index 1ec4231..2ae463a 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre_dlm.h
+++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre_dlm.h
@@ -1293,6 +1293,7 @@ enum lock_res_type {
/** Lock resource. */
static inline void lock_res(struct ldlm_resource *res)
+ __acquires(&res->lr_lock)
{
spin_lock(&res->lr_lock);
}
@@ -1306,6 +1307,7 @@ static inline void lock_res_nested(struct ldlm_resource *res,
/** Unlock resource. */
static inline void unlock_res(struct ldlm_resource *res)
+ __releases(&res->lr_lock)
{
spin_unlock(&res->lr_lock);
}
diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/l_lock.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/l_lock.c
index ea8840c..a887d9f 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/l_lock.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/l_lock.c
@@ -45,6 +45,7 @@
* being an atomic operation.
*/
struct ldlm_resource *lock_res_and_lock(struct ldlm_lock *lock)
+ __acquires(&lock->l_lock)
{
spin_lock(&lock->l_lock);
@@ -59,6 +60,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(lock_res_and_lock);
* Unlock a lock and its resource previously locked with lock_res_and_lock
*/
void unlock_res_and_lock(struct ldlm_lock *lock)
+ __releases(&lock->l_lock)
{
/* on server-side resource of lock doesn't change */
ldlm_clear_res_locked(lock);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-15 18:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-09 15:20 [PATCH] staging: lustre: lustre/ldlm: Fixed sparse warnings Nayeemahmed Badebade
2016-09-12 10:27 ` Greg KH
2016-09-14 5:14 ` Dilger, Andreas
2016-09-15 18:33 ` nayeem [this message]
2016-09-16 8:00 ` Dilger, Andreas
2016-09-18 20:21 ` nayeem
2016-09-18 20:29 ` Dilger, Andreas
2016-09-18 21:18 ` [PATCH v2] " Nayeemahmed Badebade
2016-09-18 21:27 ` Dilger, Andreas
2016-09-19 20:43 ` James Simmons
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=57DAE988.6040609@gmail.com \
--to=itachi.opsrc@gmail.com \
--cc=andreas.dilger@intel.com \
--cc=devel@driverdev.osuosl.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jsimmons@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org \
--cc=oleg.drokin@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).