All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Subject: Re: waitqueue lockdep annotation
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 10:24:34 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1a5d4610-b84e-ba29-b5bb-b80e19fc17b7@akamai.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171201230336.GA4446@lst.de>

On 12/01/2017 06:03 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 05:34:50PM -0500, Jason Baron wrote:
>> hmmm...I'm not sure how this suggestion would change the locking rules
>> from what we currently have. Right now, we use ep->lock, if we remove
>> that and use ep->wq->lock instead, there is just a 1-to-1 mapping there
>> that has not changed, since ep->wq->lock currently is completely not
>> being used.
> 
> True.  The patch below survives the amazing complex booting and starting
> systemd with lockdep enabled test.  Do we have something resembling a
> epoll test suite?
>

I don't think we have any in the kernel tree proper (other than some
selftests using epoll) but there are tests in ltp and some performance
tests such as:

http://linux-scalability.org/epoll/epoll-test.c
http://www.xmailserver.org/linux-patches/pipetest.c

Thanks,

-Jason

  reply	other threads:[~2017-12-05 15:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-11-30 14:20 waitqueue lockdep annotation Christoph Hellwig
2017-11-30 14:20 ` [PATCH 1/2] sched/wait: assert the wait_queue_head lock is held in __wake_up_common Christoph Hellwig
2017-11-30 14:20 ` [PATCH 2/2] epoll: use proper wake_up variant in ep_poll_callback Christoph Hellwig
2017-11-30 20:50 ` waitqueue lockdep annotation Andrew Morton
2017-11-30 21:38   ` Jason Baron
2017-11-30 22:11     ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-11-30 22:18       ` Jason Baron
2017-12-01 17:11         ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-12-01 19:00           ` Jason Baron
2017-12-01 22:02             ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-12-01 22:34               ` Jason Baron
2017-12-01 23:03                 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-12-05 15:24                   ` Jason Baron [this message]
2017-12-05 15:36                     ` Davidlohr Bueso
2017-12-06 23:51                     ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-12-06 23:52 Christoph Hellwig

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=1a5d4610-b84e-ba29-b5bb-b80e19fc17b7@akamai.com \
    --to=jbaron@akamai.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.