All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Byungchul Park <max.byungchul.park@gmail.com>
To: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
	Byungchul Park <max.byungchul.park@gmail.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	david@fromorbit.com, willy@infradead.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>,
	byungchul.park@lge.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, oleg@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] locking/lockdep: Remove the cross-release locking checks
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 16:38:47 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CANrsvROu_Y6nOwnTGxyL8UbMcFpYdhZrQpa=ECNUsVxNftC=zQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171215062428.5dyv7wjbzn2ggxvz@thunk.org>

On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 3:24 PM, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 01:05:43PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
>> For example, in the case of fs issues, for now we can
>> invalidate wait_for_completion() in submit_bio_wait()....
>
> And this will spawn a checkpatch.pl ERROR:
>
>                     ERROR("LOCKDEP",
>                     "lockdep_no_validate class is reserved for device->mutex.\n" . $herecurr);
>
> This mention in checkpatch.pl is the only documentation I've been able
> to find about lockdep_set_novalidate_class(), by the way.
>
>> ... and re-validate it later, of course, I really want to find more
>> fundamental solution though.
>
> Oh, and I was finally able to find the quote that the *only* people
> who are likely to be able to deal with lock annotations are the

Right. Using the word, "only", is one that I should not have done
and I apologize for.

They are just "only" people who solve and classify locks quickly,
assuming all of kernel guys are familiar with lockdep annotations.
Thus, even this statement is bad as well, since no good
document for that exists, as you pointed out. I agree.

> subsystem maintainers.  But if the ways of dealing with lock
> annotations are not documented, such that subsystem maintainers are
> going to have a very hard time figuring out *how* to deal with it, it

Right. I've agreed with this, since you pointed out it's problem not
to be documented well.

> seems that lock classification as a solution to cross-release false
> positives seems.... unlikely:
>
>    From: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
>    Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2017 18:27:45 +0900
>    Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 72/73] xfs: Convert mru cache to XArray
>
>    1) Firstly, it's hard to assign lock classes *properly*. By
>    default, it relies on the caller site of lockdep_init_map(),
>    but we need to assign another class manually, where ordering
>    rules are complicated so cannot rely on the caller site. That
>    *only* can be done by experts of the subsystem.
>
>                                         - Ted



-- 
Thanks,
Byungchul

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Byungchul Park <max.byungchul.park@gmail.com>
To: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
	Byungchul Park <max.byungchul.park@gmail.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	david@fromorbit.com, willy@infradead.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>,
	byungchul.park@lge.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, oleg@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] locking/lockdep: Remove the cross-release locking checks
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 16:38:47 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CANrsvROu_Y6nOwnTGxyL8UbMcFpYdhZrQpa=ECNUsVxNftC=zQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171215062428.5dyv7wjbzn2ggxvz@thunk.org>

On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 3:24 PM, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 01:05:43PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
>> For example, in the case of fs issues, for now we can
>> invalidate wait_for_completion() in submit_bio_wait()....
>
> And this will spawn a checkpatch.pl ERROR:
>
>                     ERROR("LOCKDEP",
>                     "lockdep_no_validate class is reserved for device->mutex.\n" . $herecurr);
>
> This mention in checkpatch.pl is the only documentation I've been able
> to find about lockdep_set_novalidate_class(), by the way.
>
>> ... and re-validate it later, of course, I really want to find more
>> fundamental solution though.
>
> Oh, and I was finally able to find the quote that the *only* people
> who are likely to be able to deal with lock annotations are the

Right. Using the word, "only", is one that I should not have done
and I apologize for.

They are just "only" people who solve and classify locks quickly,
assuming all of kernel guys are familiar with lockdep annotations.
Thus, even this statement is bad as well, since no good
document for that exists, as you pointed out. I agree.

> subsystem maintainers.  But if the ways of dealing with lock
> annotations are not documented, such that subsystem maintainers are
> going to have a very hard time figuring out *how* to deal with it, it

Right. I've agreed with this, since you pointed out it's problem not
to be documented well.

> seems that lock classification as a solution to cross-release false
> positives seems.... unlikely:
>
>    From: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
>    Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2017 18:27:45 +0900
>    Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 72/73] xfs: Convert mru cache to XArray
>
>    1) Firstly, it's hard to assign lock classes *properly*. By
>    default, it relies on the caller site of lockdep_init_map(),
>    but we need to assign another class manually, where ordering
>    rules are complicated so cannot rely on the caller site. That
>    *only* can be done by experts of the subsystem.
>
>                                         - Ted



-- 
Thanks,
Byungchul

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2017-12-15  7:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 82+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-12-13  6:24 About the try to remove cross-release feature entirely by Ingo Byungchul Park
2017-12-13  6:24 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-13  7:13 ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-13  7:13   ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-13 15:23   ` Bart Van Assche
2017-12-13 15:23     ` Bart Van Assche
2017-12-14  3:07   ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-14  3:07     ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-14  5:58     ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-14  5:58       ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-14 11:18     ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-14 11:18       ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-14 13:30       ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-14 13:30         ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-13 10:46 ` [PATCH] locking/lockdep: Remove the cross-release locking checks Ingo Molnar
2017-12-13 10:46   ` Ingo Molnar
2017-12-13 10:46   ` Ingo Molnar
2017-12-14  5:01   ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-14  5:01     ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-15  4:05     ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-15  4:05       ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-15  6:24       ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-15  6:24         ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-15  7:38         ` Byungchul Park [this message]
2017-12-15  7:38           ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-15  8:39         ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-15  8:39           ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-15 21:15           ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-15 21:15             ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-16  2:41             ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-16  2:41               ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-29  1:47 ` About the try to remove cross-release feature entirely by Ingo Byungchul Park
2017-12-29  1:47   ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-29  2:02   ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-29  2:02     ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-29  3:51   ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-29  3:51     ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-29  7:28     ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-29  7:28       ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-30  6:16       ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-30  6:16         ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-30 15:40         ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-30 15:40           ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-30 20:44           ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-30 20:44             ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-30 22:40             ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-30 22:40               ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-30 23:00               ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-30 23:00                 ` Theodore Ts'o
2018-01-01 10:18                 ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-01-01 10:18                   ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-01-01 16:00                   ` Theodore Ts'o
2018-01-01 16:00                     ` Theodore Ts'o
2018-01-03  2:38                     ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03  2:38                       ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03  2:28                   ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03  2:28                     ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03  2:58                     ` Dave Chinner
2018-01-03  2:58                       ` Dave Chinner
2018-01-03  5:48                       ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03  5:48                         ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-05 16:49                   ` J. Bruce Fields
2018-01-05 16:49                     ` J. Bruce Fields
2018-01-05 17:05                     ` J. Bruce Fields
2018-01-05 17:05                       ` J. Bruce Fields
2018-01-03  2:10               ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03  2:10                 ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03  7:05                 ` Theodore Ts'o
2018-01-03  7:05                   ` Theodore Ts'o
2018-01-03  8:10                   ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03  8:10                     ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03  8:23                     ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03  8:23                       ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03  8:23                       ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03  1:57           ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-03  1:57             ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-02  7:57         ` Byungchul Park
2018-01-02  7:57           ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-29  8:09   ` Amir Goldstein
2017-12-29  8:09     ` Amir Goldstein
2017-12-29  9:46     ` Byungchul Park
2017-12-29  9:46       ` Byungchul Park

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='CANrsvROu_Y6nOwnTGxyL8UbMcFpYdhZrQpa=ECNUsVxNftC=zQ@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=max.byungchul.park@gmail.com \
    --cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
    --cc=byungchul.park@lge.com \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    --cc=willy@infradead.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.