From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 6/7] locking/lockdep: Reuse freed chain_hlocks entries
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2020 10:48:38 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200205094838.GI14879@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f7f4151d-6514-be7b-1915-37f19411ca96@redhat.com>
On Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 11:57:09AM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
> Wait, it is possible that we can have deadlock like this:
>
> cpu 0 cpu 1
> ----- -----
> lock A lock B
> <irq> <irq>
> lock B lock A
>
> If we eliminate 1-entry chain, will that impact our ability to detect this
> kind of deadlock?
I'm thinking that should trigger irq-inversion (irq-on vs in-irq) on
either A or B (depending on timing).
AFAICT the irq-state tracking is outside of validate_chain().
This is also why I think your separate_irq_context() change is not
needed.
validate_chain() really only checks the per-context lock nesting, and
there, a single lock doesn't do very much. Hence my proposed patch.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-05 9:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-03 16:41 [PATCH v5 0/7] locking/lockdep: Reuse zapped chain_hlocks entries Waiman Long
2020-02-03 16:41 ` [PATCH v5 1/7] locking/lockdep: Decrement irq context counters when removing lock chain Waiman Long
2020-02-03 16:41 ` [PATCH v5 2/7] locking/lockdep: Display irq_context names in /proc/lockdep_chains Waiman Long
2020-02-03 16:41 ` [PATCH v5 3/7] locking/lockdep: Track number of zapped classes Waiman Long
2020-02-03 16:41 ` [PATCH v5 4/7] locking/lockdep: Throw away all lock chains with zapped class Waiman Long
2020-02-03 16:41 ` [PATCH v5 5/7] locking/lockdep: Track number of zapped lock chains Waiman Long
2020-02-03 16:41 ` [PATCH v5 6/7] locking/lockdep: Reuse freed chain_hlocks entries Waiman Long
2020-02-04 12:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-04 14:54 ` Waiman Long
2020-02-04 16:45 ` Waiman Long
2020-02-05 9:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-05 13:59 ` Waiman Long
2020-02-04 15:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-04 16:12 ` Waiman Long
2020-02-04 16:26 ` Waiman Long
2020-02-04 16:57 ` Waiman Long
2020-02-05 9:48 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2020-02-05 14:03 ` Waiman Long
2020-02-03 16:41 ` [PATCH v5 7/7] locking/lockdep: Add a fast path for chain_hlocks allocation Waiman Long
2020-02-04 12:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-04 15:07 ` Waiman Long
2020-02-04 13:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-04 13:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-04 18:02 ` Waiman Long
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=20200205094838.GI14879@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.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).