Re: [PATCH 1/2] [RFC v2] seqcount: Add lockdep functionality toseqcount/seqlock structures

From: Ingo Molnar
Date: Tue Sep 17 2013 - 04:28:18 EST



* John Stultz <john.stultz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 09/13/2013 05:19 PM, John Stultz wrote:
> > Currently seqlocks and seqcounts don't support lockdep.
> >
> > After running across a seqcount related deadlock in the timekeeping
> > code, I used a less-refined and more focused varient of this patch
> > to narrow down the cause of the issue.
> >
> > This is a first-pass attempt to properly enable lockdep functionality
> > on seqlocks and seqcounts.
> >
> > Since seqcounts are used in the vdso gettimeofday code, I've provided
> > lockdep accessors.
> >
> > I've also handled one cases where there were nested seqlock writers
> > and there may be more edge cases.
>
> Oof.
>
> So I just noticed there's a bunch of places in the network code that use
> fairly deeply embedded seqcounter: u64_stats_sync. There's almost never
> an explicit initialization, as they assume they're zeroed when
> allocated, but this causes trouble with the lockdep key initialization.
>
> I'll have to go through each of these (about 25 cases) and make them
> call seqcount_init(), but since I'm heading to plumbers tomorrow I might
> not get to it until next week.
>
> Anyway, let me know if you have any other thoughts on the patches.

Explicit initialization is generally a bonus for readability,
debuggability and ease of development, we enforce that for spinlocks as
well.

Thanks,

Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/