From: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, walken@google.com,
boqun.feng@gmail.com, kirill@shutemov.name,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
npiggin@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 05/15] lockdep: Make check_prev_add can use a separate stack_trace
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 11:04:32 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170118020432.GK3326@X58A-UD3R> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170117155431.GE5680@worktop>
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 04:54:31PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 07:11:43PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> > What do you think about the following patches doing it?
>
> I was more thinking about something like so...
>
> Also, I think I want to muck with struct stack_trace; the members:
> max_nr_entries and skip are input arguments to save_stack_trace() and
> bloat the structure for no reason.
With your approach, save_trace() must be called whenever check_prevs_add()
is called, which might be unnecessary.
Frankly speaking, I think what I proposed resolved it neatly. Don't you
think so?
>
> ---
> diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> index 7c38f8f3d97b..f2df300a96ee 100644
> --- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> +++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> @@ -430,6 +430,21 @@ static int save_trace(struct stack_trace *trace)
> return 1;
> }
>
> +static bool return_trace(struct stack_trace *trace)
> +{
> + /*
> + * If @trace is the last trace generated by save_trace(), then we can
> + * return the entries by simply subtracting @nr_stack_trace_entries
> + * again.
> + */
> + if (trace->entries != stack_trace + nr_stack_trace_entries - trace->nr_entres)
> + return false;
> +
> + nr_stack_trace_entries -= trace->nr_entries;
> + trace->entries = NULL;
> + return true;
> +}
> +
> unsigned int nr_hardirq_chains;
> unsigned int nr_softirq_chains;
> unsigned int nr_process_chains;
> @@ -1797,20 +1812,12 @@ static inline void inc_chains(void)
> */
> static int
> check_prev_add(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *prev,
> - struct held_lock *next, int distance, int *stack_saved)
> + struct held_lock *next, int distance, struct stack_trace *trace)
> {
> struct lock_list *entry;
> int ret;
> struct lock_list this;
> struct lock_list *uninitialized_var(target_entry);
> - /*
> - * Static variable, serialized by the graph_lock().
> - *
> - * We use this static variable to save the stack trace in case
> - * we call into this function multiple times due to encountering
> - * trylocks in the held lock stack.
> - */
> - static struct stack_trace trace;
>
> /*
> * Prove that the new <prev> -> <next> dependency would not
> @@ -1858,11 +1865,7 @@ static inline void inc_chains(void)
> }
> }
>
> - if (!*stack_saved) {
> - if (!save_trace(&trace))
> - return 0;
> - *stack_saved = 1;
> - }
> + trace->skip = 1; /* mark used */
>
> /*
> * Ok, all validations passed, add the new lock
> @@ -1870,14 +1873,14 @@ static inline void inc_chains(void)
> */
> ret = add_lock_to_list(hlock_class(next),
> &hlock_class(prev)->locks_after,
> - next->acquire_ip, distance, &trace);
> + next->acquire_ip, distance, trace);
>
> if (!ret)
> return 0;
>
> ret = add_lock_to_list(hlock_class(prev),
> &hlock_class(next)->locks_before,
> - next->acquire_ip, distance, &trace);
> + next->acquire_ip, distance, trace);
> if (!ret)
> return 0;
>
> @@ -1885,8 +1888,6 @@ static inline void inc_chains(void)
> * Debugging printouts:
> */
> if (verbose(hlock_class(prev)) || verbose(hlock_class(next))) {
> - /* We drop graph lock, so another thread can overwrite trace. */
> - *stack_saved = 0;
> graph_unlock();
> printk("\n new dependency: ");
> print_lock_name(hlock_class(prev));
> @@ -1908,10 +1909,15 @@ static inline void inc_chains(void)
> static int
> check_prevs_add(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *next)
> {
> + struct stack_trace trace = { .nr_entries = 0, .skip = 0, };
> int depth = curr->lockdep_depth;
> - int stack_saved = 0;
> struct held_lock *hlock;
>
> + if (!save_trace(&trace))
> + goto out_bug;
> +
> + trace.skip = 0; /* abuse to mark usage */
> +
> /*
> * Debugging checks.
> *
> @@ -1936,7 +1942,7 @@ static inline void inc_chains(void)
> */
> if (hlock->read != 2 && hlock->check) {
> if (!check_prev_add(curr, hlock, next,
> - distance, &stack_saved))
> + distance, &trace))
> return 0;
> /*
> * Stop after the first non-trylock entry,
> @@ -1962,6 +1968,9 @@ static inline void inc_chains(void)
> }
> return 1;
> out_bug:
> + if (trace.nr_entries && !trace.skip)
> + return_trace(&trace);
> +
> if (!debug_locks_off_graph_unlock())
> return 0;
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-18 2:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-12-09 5:11 [PATCH v4 00/15] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature Byungchul Park
2016-12-09 5:11 ` [PATCH v4 01/15] x86/dumpstack: Optimize save_stack_trace Byungchul Park
2016-12-09 5:11 ` [PATCH v4 02/15] x86/dumpstack: Add save_stack_trace()_fast() Byungchul Park
2016-12-09 5:11 ` [PATCH v4 03/15] lockdep: Refactor lookup_chain_cache() Byungchul Park
2016-12-09 5:12 ` [PATCH v4 04/15] lockdep: Add a function building a chain between two classes Byungchul Park
2017-01-10 21:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-01-12 1:41 ` Byungchul Park
2016-12-09 5:12 ` [PATCH v4 05/15] lockdep: Make check_prev_add can use a separate stack_trace Byungchul Park
2017-01-12 16:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-01-13 2:45 ` Byungchul Park
2017-01-13 4:09 ` [PATCH] lockdep: Make a stack_trace instance passed to check_prev_add as an arg Byungchul Park
2017-01-13 4:38 ` Byungchul Park
2017-01-13 10:11 ` [PATCH v4 05/15] lockdep: Make check_prev_add can use a separate stack_trace Byungchul Park
2017-01-13 10:17 ` [PATCH 1/2] lockdep: Refactor save_trace() Byungchul Park
2017-01-13 10:17 ` [PATCH 2/2] lockdep: Pass a callback arg to check_prev_add() to handle stack_trace Byungchul Park
2017-01-17 15:54 ` [PATCH v4 05/15] lockdep: Make check_prev_add can use a separate stack_trace Peter Zijlstra
2017-01-18 2:04 ` Byungchul Park [this message]
2017-01-18 15:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-01-19 2:47 ` Byungchul Park
2016-12-09 5:12 ` [PATCH v4 06/15] lockdep: Make save_trace can skip stack tracing of the current Byungchul Park
2017-01-12 16:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-01-13 0:18 ` Byungchul Park
2016-12-09 5:12 ` [PATCH v4 07/15] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature Byungchul Park
2017-01-13 4:39 ` Lai Jiangshan
2017-01-13 5:02 ` Byungchul Park
2017-01-16 15:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-01-17 2:05 ` Byungchul Park
2017-01-17 7:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-01-17 7:49 ` Byungchul Park
2017-01-17 7:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-01-17 7:45 ` Byungchul Park
2017-01-16 15:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-01-17 2:33 ` Byungchul Park
2017-01-17 6:24 ` Boqun Feng
2017-01-17 7:43 ` Byungchul Park
2016-12-09 5:12 ` [PATCH v4 08/15] lockdep: Make crossrelease use save_stack_trace_fast() Byungchul Park
2016-12-09 5:12 ` [PATCH v4 09/15] lockdep: Make print_circular_bug() crosslock-aware Byungchul Park
2016-12-09 5:12 ` [PATCH v4 10/15] lockdep: Apply crossrelease to completion operation Byungchul Park
2016-12-09 5:12 ` [PATCH v4 11/15] pagemap.h: Remove trailing white space Byungchul Park
2016-12-09 5:12 ` [PATCH v4 12/15] lockdep: Apply crossrelease to PG_locked lock Byungchul Park
2016-12-09 5:12 ` [PATCH v4 13/15] lockdep: Apply lock_acquire(release) on __Set(__Clear)PageLocked Byungchul Park
2016-12-09 5:12 ` [PATCH v4 14/15] lockdep: Move data used in CONFIG_LOCKDEP_PAGELOCK from page to page_ext Byungchul Park
2016-12-09 5:12 ` [PATCH v4 15/15] lockdep: Crossrelease feature documentation Byungchul Park
2017-01-10 20:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-01-11 1:29 ` Byungchul Park
2017-01-18 6:42 ` Boqun Feng
2017-01-18 10:53 ` Byungchul Park
2017-01-18 11:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-01-18 11:54 ` Byungchul Park
2017-01-18 12:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-01-18 12:14 ` byungchul.park
2017-01-18 14:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-01-19 1:54 ` Byungchul Park
2017-01-18 12:49 ` byungchul.park
2016-12-09 5:21 ` [FYI] Output of 'cat /proc/lockdep' after applying crossrelease 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=20170118020432.GK3326@X58A-UD3R \
--to=byungchul.park@lge.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=walken@google.com \
/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 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).