From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
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: Thu, 7 Dec 2017 00:51:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171206235141.GB17876@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1a5d4610-b84e-ba29-b5bb-b80e19fc17b7@akamai.com>
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 10:24:34AM -0500, Jason Baron wrote:
> 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
That one just seems to keep running until interrupted. I've run
it for a while and it seems fine, but I doesn't seem to get any
ok/failed kind of status.
> http://www.xmailserver.org/linux-patches/pipetest.c
Seems to work fine as well, so I'm going to resend the updated patch.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-12-06 23:51 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
2017-12-05 15:36 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2017-12-06 23:51 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
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=20171206235141.GB17876@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=jbaron@akamai.com \
--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 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).