[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120207044816.GA31271@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru>
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2012 08:48:16 +0400
From: Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@...aro.org>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
San Mehat <san@...gle.com>, Colin Cross <ccross@...roid.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...roid.com,
linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/6] oom: Make find_lock_task_mm() sparse-aware
This is needed so that callers would not get 'context imbalance'
warnings from the sparse tool.
As a side effect, this patch fixes the following sparse warnings:
CHECK mm/oom_kill.c
mm/oom_kill.c:201:28: warning: context imbalance in 'oom_badness' -
unexpected unlock
include/linux/rcupdate.h:249:30: warning: context imbalance in
'dump_tasks' - unexpected unlock
mm/oom_kill.c:453:9: warning: context imbalance in 'oom_kill_task' -
unexpected unlock
CHECK mm/memcontrol.c
...
mm/memcontrol.c:1130:17: warning: context imbalance in
'task_in_mem_cgroup' - unexpected unlock
Signed-off-by: Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@...aro.org>
---
On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 04:27:32PM -0500, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
[...]
> >> Unfortunately this isn't possible in this case. Unlike '({})' GCC
> >> extension, do-while statement does not evaluate to a value, i.e.
> >> 'x = do { 123; } while (0);' is illegal.
> >
> > Ah, you are right, my bad, sorry about that.
> >
> > greg k-h
>
> Some __cond_lock() caller are inline functions. Is this bad?
No, that's great, actually. :-) Not obvious, but seems like
sparse understands __cond_lock in inline functions, so I'd
better use it.
Thanks,
include/linux/oom.h | 12 +++++++++++-
mm/oom_kill.c | 2 +-
2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/oom.h b/include/linux/oom.h
index 552fba9..7c8946a 100644
--- a/include/linux/oom.h
+++ b/include/linux/oom.h
@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
#ifdef __KERNEL__
+#include <linux/compiler.h>
#include <linux/sched.h>
#include <linux/types.h>
#include <linux/nodemask.h>
@@ -65,7 +66,16 @@ static inline void oom_killer_enable(void)
oom_killer_disabled = false;
}
-extern struct task_struct *find_lock_task_mm(struct task_struct *p);
+extern struct task_struct *__find_lock_task_mm(struct task_struct *p);
+
+static inline struct task_struct *find_lock_task_mm(struct task_struct *p)
+{
+ struct task_struct *ret;
+
+ ret = __find_lock_task_mm(p);
+ (void)__cond_lock(&p->alloc_lock, ret);
+ return ret;
+}
/* sysctls */
extern int sysctl_oom_dump_tasks;
diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
index 2958fd8..0ebb383 100644
--- a/mm/oom_kill.c
+++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
@@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ static bool has_intersects_mems_allowed(struct task_struct *tsk,
* pointer. Return p, or any of its subthreads with a valid ->mm, with
* task_lock() held.
*/
-struct task_struct *find_lock_task_mm(struct task_struct *p)
+struct task_struct *__find_lock_task_mm(struct task_struct *p)
{
struct task_struct *t = p;
--
1.7.7.6
--
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