All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org,
	Qian Cai <cai@redhat.com>,
	Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] lockdep: Avoid to modify chain keys in validate_chain()
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 18:28:38 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201110172838.GP2594@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201102053743.450459-1-boqun.feng@gmail.com>

On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 01:37:41PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> Chris Wilson reported a problem spotted by check_chain_key(): a chain
> key got changed in validate_chain() because we modify the ->read in
> validate_chain() to skip checks for dependency adding, and ->read is
> taken into calculation for chain key since commit f611e8cf98ec
> ("lockdep: Take read/write status in consideration when generate
> chainkey").
> 
> Fix this by avoiding to modify ->read in validate_chain() based on two
> facts: a) since we now support recursive read lock detection, there is
> no need to skip checks for dependency adding for recursive readers, b)
> since we have a), there is only one case left (nest_lock) where we want
> to skip checks in validate_chain(), we simply remove the modification
> for ->read and rely on the return value of check_deadlock() to skip the
> dependency adding.
> 
> Reported-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>

Thanks Boqun!

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-11-10 17:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-09-29 14:31 lockdep null-ptr-deref Qian Cai
2020-09-29 23:08 ` Boqun Feng
2020-09-30  9:16   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-09-30  9:49     ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-09-30 12:18       ` Boqun Feng
2020-09-30 19:02         ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-02 12:36           ` Boqun Feng
2020-10-02 13:09             ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-02 13:35               ` Boqun Feng
2020-10-02 10:06       ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-02 13:40         ` Qian Cai
2020-10-07 16:20       ` [tip: locking/core] lockdep: Fix usage_traceoverflow tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-27 11:29         ` Chris Wilson
2020-10-27 11:59           ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-27 12:30             ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-27 12:48               ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-27 14:13                 ` Chris Wilson
2020-10-31 11:30                 ` [tip: locking/urgent] lockdep: Fix nr_unused_locks accounting tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-27 13:29               ` [tip: locking/core] lockdep: Fix usage_traceoverflow Chris Wilson
2020-10-27 15:45                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-27 16:34                   ` Chris Wilson
2020-10-28 17:40                     ` Chris Wilson
2020-10-28 18:06                       ` Chris Wilson
2020-10-28 19:42                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-28 19:59                         ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-30  3:51                           ` Boqun Feng
2020-10-30  9:38                             ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-30  9:55                               ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-11-02  5:37                               ` [PATCH 1/2] lockdep: Avoid to modify chain keys in validate_chain() Boqun Feng
2020-11-02  5:37                                 ` [PATCH 2/2] lockdep/selftest: Add spin_nest_lock test Boqun Feng
2020-12-03 10:35                                   ` [tip: locking/core] " tip-bot2 for Boqun Feng
2020-11-05  6:25                                 ` [PATCH 1/2] lockdep: Avoid to modify chain keys in validate_chain() Boqun Feng
2020-11-10 17:28                                 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2020-11-11  8:23                                 ` [tip: locking/urgent] " tip-bot2 for Boqun Feng
2020-10-09  7:58       ` [tip: locking/core] lockdep: Fix usage_traceoverflow tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra

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=20201110172838.GP2594@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=cai@redhat.com \
    --cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --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 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.