[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1303144073.7181.39.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 12:27:53 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/7] lockdep: Annotate read/write states
On Sun, 2011-04-17 at 11:45 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> plain text document attachment
> (gautham_r_shenoy-lockdep-annotate_read_write_states.patch)
> From: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>
>
> Currently we do not save the recursive read dependencies in the dependency
> chain. As a result, a deadlock caused by the following chains are not spotted,
> since we never have the chain 1 in our dependency list:
>
> 1: Rlock(A) --> lock(B)
> 2: lock(B) --> Wlock(A), where A is a recursive read lock.
>
> Before adding the Recursive Read locks to the dependency chains, we need to
> distinguish them from the normal read locks since the conflicting states for
> these two are quite different.
>
> Currently the read/write status of a lock while it's acquired is denoted by a
> monotonically increasing variable where:
>
> 0 - WRITE
> 1 - READ
> 2 - RECURSIVE READ
>
> In this patch, we propose to modify this distinction from a monotonically
> increasing variable to a bit mask where:
>
> 0x1 - WRITE
> 0x2 - READ
> 0x4 - RECURSIVE READ
>
> This helps us to define the conflicting states for each lock with ease:
> Thereby, the conflicting states for a given states are defined as follows:
>
> Conflicting_states(WRITE): RECURSIVE_READ | READ | WRITE
> Conflicting_states(READ): READ | WRITE
> Conflicting_states(RECURSIVE_READ): WRITE
>
> Also, we use one more bit in the bitmask to distinguish the first recursive
> read in the current chain from the others, since it is sufficient to add only
> this dependency to the dependency list.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
> ---
> include/linux/lockdep.h | 107 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
> kernel/lockdep.c | 46 ++++++++++----------
> 2 files changed, 105 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-)
>
> Index: tip/include/linux/lockdep.h
> ===================================================================
> --- tip.orig/include/linux/lockdep.h
> +++ tip/include/linux/lockdep.h
> @@ -233,10 +233,11 @@ struct held_lock {
> unsigned int irq_context:2; /* bit 0 - soft, bit 1 - hard */
> unsigned int trylock:1; /* 16 bits */
>
> - unsigned int read:2; /* see lock_acquire() comment */
> + unsigned int rw_state:4; /* see lock states comment */
> unsigned int check:2; /* see lock_acquire() comment */
> unsigned int hardirqs_off:1;
> - unsigned int references:11; /* 32 bits */
> +
> + unsigned short references;
> };
>
> /*
> @@ -286,6 +287,15 @@ extern void lockdep_init_map(struct lock
>
> #define lockdep_set_novalidate_class(lock) \
> lockdep_set_class(lock, &__lockdep_no_validate__)
> +
> +/* lock_state bits */
> +#define _W_ 0
> +#define _R_ (_W_ + 1)
> +#define _RR_ (_W_ + 2)
> +#define _FIRST_RR_ (_W_ + 3)
> +
> +#define get_lock_state(lock_bit) (1 << lock_bit)
> +
> /*
> * Compare locking classes
> */
> @@ -298,13 +308,40 @@ static inline int lockdep_match_key(stru
> }
>
> /*
> - * Acquire a lock.
> + * lock states:
> + *
> + * A given lock can have one of the following states:
> + * - STATE_WRITE: Exclusive Write.
> + * - STATE_READ: Non-recursive read.
> + * - STATE_RECURSIVE_READ: Recursive Read.
> *
Heh, you did comment them. But please move this up, or duplicate them.
;)
-- Steve
--
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