diff options
author | Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> | 2008-08-11 09:30:24 +0200 |
---|---|---|
committer | Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> | 2008-08-11 09:30:24 +0200 |
commit | 7531e2f34d1d551b096143f19111139f0dd84c8b (patch) | |
tree | 0a29d6703e28dc6752b9b4085594cca238595aac /kernel/lockdep.c | |
parent | 4f3e7524b2e703d9f8b02ac338153a53dd7ede66 (diff) | |
download | kernel_samsung_smdk4412-7531e2f34d1d551b096143f19111139f0dd84c8b.zip kernel_samsung_smdk4412-7531e2f34d1d551b096143f19111139f0dd84c8b.tar.gz kernel_samsung_smdk4412-7531e2f34d1d551b096143f19111139f0dd84c8b.tar.bz2 |
lockdep: lock protection locks
On Fri, 2008-08-01 at 16:26 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Aug 2008, David Miller wrote:
> >
> > Taking more than a few locks of the same class at once is bad
> > news and it's better to find an alternative method.
>
> It's not always wrong.
>
> If you can guarantee that anybody that takes more than one lock of a
> particular class will always take a single top-level lock _first_, then
> that's all good. You can obviously screw up and take the same lock _twice_
> (which will deadlock), but at least you cannot get into ABBA situations.
>
> So maybe the right thing to do is to just teach lockdep about "lock
> protection locks". That would have solved the multi-queue issues for
> networking too - all the actual network drivers would still have taken
> just their single queue lock, but the one case that needs to take all of
> them would have taken a separate top-level lock first.
>
> Never mind that the multi-queue locks were always taken in the same order:
> it's never wrong to just have some top-level serialization, and anybody
> who needs to take <n> locks might as well do <n+1>, because they sure as
> hell aren't going to be on _any_ fastpaths.
>
> So the simplest solution really sounds like just teaching lockdep about
> that one special case. It's not "nesting" exactly, although it's obviously
> related to it.
Do as Linus suggested. The lock protection lock is called nest_lock.
Note that we still have the MAX_LOCK_DEPTH (48) limit to consider, so anything
that spills that it still up shit creek.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Diffstat (limited to 'kernel/lockdep.c')
-rw-r--r-- | kernel/lockdep.c | 26 |
1 files changed, 21 insertions, 5 deletions
diff --git a/kernel/lockdep.c b/kernel/lockdep.c index d3c72ad..410c336 100644 --- a/kernel/lockdep.c +++ b/kernel/lockdep.c @@ -1372,18 +1372,32 @@ check_deadlock(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *next, struct lockdep_map *next_instance, int read) { struct held_lock *prev; + struct held_lock *nest = NULL; int i; for (i = 0; i < curr->lockdep_depth; i++) { prev = curr->held_locks + i; + + if (prev->instance == next->nest_lock) + nest = prev; + if (hlock_class(prev) != hlock_class(next)) continue; + /* * Allow read-after-read recursion of the same * lock class (i.e. read_lock(lock)+read_lock(lock)): */ if ((read == 2) && prev->read) return 2; + + /* + * We're holding the nest_lock, which serializes this lock's + * nesting behaviour. + */ + if (nest) + return 2; + return print_deadlock_bug(curr, prev, next); } return 1; @@ -2507,7 +2521,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(lockdep_init_map); */ static int __lock_acquire(struct lockdep_map *lock, unsigned int subclass, int trylock, int read, int check, int hardirqs_off, - unsigned long ip) + struct lockdep_map *nest_lock, unsigned long ip) { struct task_struct *curr = current; struct lock_class *class = NULL; @@ -2566,6 +2580,7 @@ static int __lock_acquire(struct lockdep_map *lock, unsigned int subclass, hlock->class_idx = class - lock_classes + 1; hlock->acquire_ip = ip; hlock->instance = lock; + hlock->nest_lock = nest_lock; hlock->trylock = trylock; hlock->read = read; hlock->check = check; @@ -2717,7 +2732,7 @@ found_it: if (!__lock_acquire(hlock->instance, hlock_class(hlock)->subclass, hlock->trylock, hlock->read, hlock->check, hlock->hardirqs_off, - hlock->acquire_ip)) + hlock->nest_lock, hlock->acquire_ip)) return 0; } @@ -2778,7 +2793,7 @@ found_it: if (!__lock_acquire(hlock->instance, hlock_class(hlock)->subclass, hlock->trylock, hlock->read, hlock->check, hlock->hardirqs_off, - hlock->acquire_ip)) + hlock->nest_lock, hlock->acquire_ip)) return 0; } @@ -2915,7 +2930,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(lock_set_subclass); * and also avoid lockdep recursion: */ void lock_acquire(struct lockdep_map *lock, unsigned int subclass, - int trylock, int read, int check, unsigned long ip) + int trylock, int read, int check, + struct lockdep_map *nest_lock, unsigned long ip) { unsigned long flags; @@ -2930,7 +2946,7 @@ void lock_acquire(struct lockdep_map *lock, unsigned int subclass, current->lockdep_recursion = 1; __lock_acquire(lock, subclass, trylock, read, check, - irqs_disabled_flags(flags), ip); + irqs_disabled_flags(flags), nest_lock, ip); current->lockdep_recursion = 0; raw_local_irq_restore(flags); } |