LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] lockdep: implement full check without irq checking
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 11:36:35 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1225362995.3690.10.camel@johannes.berg> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1225293796.9315.4.camel@lappy.programming.kicks-ass.net>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1513 bytes --]

On Wed, 2008-10-29 at 16:23 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> This thing worries me, can you help my exhausted brain a long a little..
> 
> So I take it the idea is to couple the lock chains of the site calling
> del_timer_sync and the actual timer.
> 
> We do this by holding a fake lock while executing the timer, so that its
> lock chain starts with that lock.
> 
> We then acquire the fake lock on del_timer_sync so as to establish a
> relation.

Right. Same way as the workqueue code. Mind you, I'm not sure this is
even worth it, in running it I haven't found a bug and I because timer
code may not sleep you can only take spinlocks in them, and I suspect
that it's unlikely somebody will try to cancel_sync a timer under a
spinlock, though it is of course possible.

> Now you get warnings about using a lock in hardirq context that was
> previously used !irq-safe, right?
> 
> So why not simply write something like:
> 
> 
> del_timer_sync():
> 
>   local_irq_save(flags);
>   lock_aquire(my fake timer lock);
>   lock_release(...);
>   local_irq_restore(flags);
> 
> and make that conditional CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING and or wrap it up
> somewhere..

Yeah, that is possible, but it seemed to me that would affect the
performance of del_timer_sync() quite a bit. Not sure it matters. And on
powerpc (which I care about) it won't actually affect performance much
because we lazily disable IRQs, but still. The >= 2 change also seemed
to generate smaller code?

johannes

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2008-10-30 10:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-10-23 19:35 [PATCH 0/2] Timer sync lock checking Johannes Berg
2008-10-23 19:44 ` [PATCH 1/2] lockdep: implement full check without irq checking Johannes Berg
2008-10-29 15:23   ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-10-30 10:36     ` Johannes Berg [this message]
2008-10-30 11:15       ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-10-30 11:25         ` Johannes Berg
2008-10-23 19:46 ` [PATCH 2/2] timer: implement lockdep deadlock detection Johannes Berg
2008-10-23 20:37 ` [PATCH 3/2] tasklet: " Johannes Berg

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=1225362995.3690.10.camel@johannes.berg \
    --to=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH 1/2] lockdep: implement full check without irq checking' \
    /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

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).