[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1218436725.30464.52.camel@caritas-dev.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 14:38:45 +0800
From: Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
To: Rabin Vincent <rabin@....in>
Cc: Eric Sesterhenn <snakebyte@....de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lockdep: handle chains involving classes defined in
modules
On Sat, 2008-08-09 at 03:55 +0530, Rabin Vincent wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 08, 2008 at 11:24:37AM +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
> > On Fri, 2008-08-08 at 02:27 +0530, Rabin Vincent wrote:
> > > /proc/lockdep_chains currently oopses after any module which creates and
> > > uses a lock is unloaded. This is because one of the chains involves a
> > > class which was defined in the module just unloaded.
> > >
> > > The classes are already correctly taken care of using the
> > > all_lock_classes which keeps track of all active lock classses. Add a
> > > similar all_lock_chains list and use it for keeping track of chains.
> > >
> [...]
> >
> > I think there is a simpler method to deal with this.
>
> Yes. I went with the all_lock_chains list approach because there was
> similar code already being used to keep track of lock_class structures.
>
> > - Mark class as useless during zap_class()
> > - When output lock_chain, if some classes are useless, do not output the
> > class.
>
> Like the patch below? I set ->key to NULL after zapping the class and
> use that as a condition to not print the class' information. The only
> issue is that with this patch there will be some chains output with no
> locks listed under them.
>
> ---
> lockdep: handle chains involving classes defined in modules
>
> /proc/lockdep_chains currently oopses after any module which creates and
> uses a lock is unloaded. This is because one of the chains involves a
> class which was defined in the module just unloaded.
>
> Solve this by marking the classes as unused and not printing information
> about the unused classes.
>
> Reported-by: Eric Sesterhenn <snakebyte@....de>
> Signed-off-by: Rabin Vincent <rabin@....in>
>
> diff --git a/kernel/lockdep.c b/kernel/lockdep.c
> index d38a643..8ade874 100644
> --- a/kernel/lockdep.c
> +++ b/kernel/lockdep.c
> @@ -2988,6 +2988,7 @@ static void zap_class(struct lock_class *class)
> list_del_rcu(&class->hash_entry);
> list_del_rcu(&class->lock_entry);
>
> + class->key = NULL;
> }
>
> static inline int within(const void *addr, void *start, unsigned long size)
> diff --git a/kernel/lockdep_proc.c b/kernel/lockdep_proc.c
> index 9b0e940..f09b6c7 100644
> --- a/kernel/lockdep_proc.c
> +++ b/kernel/lockdep_proc.c
> @@ -229,6 +229,9 @@ static int lc_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
>
> for (i = 0; i < chain->depth; i++) {
> class = lock_chain_get_class(chain, i);
> + if (!class->key)
> + continue;
> +
> seq_printf(m, "[%p] ", class->key);
> print_name(m, class);
> seq_puts(m, "\n");
I think this patch is OK.
Acked-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
Best Regards,
Huang Ying
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists