[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120504165232.GB24639@google.com>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 09:52:32 -0700
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Lockdep false positive in sysfs
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 05:30:30PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2012, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
> > > Would it be better to release just the lockdep annotation while
> > > continuing to hold the actual lock, or to really drop the lock?
> >
> > Just the lockdep annotation, I think.
>
> This is turning out to be harder than it looked.
>
> In order to release the lockdep annotation, I need the lockdep_map
> which is stored in the sysfs_dirent structure. But when the attribute
> method is called, all it is given is a pointer to the attribute itself
> (which contains the lockdep_class_key but not the lockdep_map) and a
> pointer to the corresponding kobject.
>
> Is there any reasonable way to get from the kobject and the attribute
> to the appropriate sysfs_dirent? Search through all the groups
> attached to the kobject? Restrict the new interface so that it can be
> used only by attributes at the kobject's top level (i.e., not in a
> named group)?
>
> Any suggestions?
Urgh... I can't think of anything pretty. How about just marking the
attr as "I'm special" and let sysfs code override lockdep annotation?
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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