[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACVXFVP290dwgJVhgMf9girR9h0yU_mjxcN2Po0u1c1y4=QL0w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 14:01:41 +0800
From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tty: tty_mutex: fix lockdep warning in tty_lock_pair(v1)
Hi,
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com> wrote:
> Commit d29f3ef39be4eec0362b985305fc526d9be318cf(tty_lock:
> Localise the lock) introduces tty_lock_pair, in which
> may cause lockdep warning because two locks with same lock
> class are to be acquired one after another.
>
> This patch uses mutex_lock_nested annotation to avoid
> the warning as suggested by Peter.
Sorry, please ignore the patch because it misses the change on
tty_unlock_pair, and the correct one should be [1].
Even though the patch is applied, there is still one related problem about
mixing tty_lock_pair with tty_unlock and tty_lock. If tty locks are
held by calling
tty_lock_pair, then deadlock warning between legacy_mutex/1 and legacy_mutex
may be triggered if tty_unlock(tty) and tty_lock(tty) are called later
when tty < tty2,
see tty_ldisc_release() in tty_release().
Thanks,
--
Ming Lei
[1],
---
drivers/tty/tty_mutex.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++-------
1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/tty/tty_mutex.c b/drivers/tty/tty_mutex.c
index 69adc80..c7f4523 100644
--- a/drivers/tty/tty_mutex.c
+++ b/drivers/tty/tty_mutex.c
@@ -10,7 +10,8 @@
* Getting the big tty mutex.
*/
-void __lockfunc tty_lock(struct tty_struct *tty)
+static void __lockfunc tty_lock_nested(struct tty_struct *tty,
+ int subclass)
{
if (tty->magic != TTY_MAGIC) {
printk(KERN_ERR "L Bad %p\n", tty);
@@ -18,7 +19,12 @@ void __lockfunc tty_lock(struct tty_struct *tty)
return;
}
tty_kref_get(tty);
- mutex_lock(&tty->legacy_mutex);
+ mutex_lock_nested(&tty->legacy_mutex, subclass);
+}
+
+void __lockfunc tty_lock(struct tty_struct *tty)
+{
+ tty_lock_nested(tty, 0);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(tty_lock);
@@ -43,11 +49,14 @@ void __lockfunc tty_lock_pair(struct tty_struct *tty,
{
if (tty < tty2) {
tty_lock(tty);
- tty_lock(tty2);
+ tty_lock_nested(tty2, SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING);
} else {
- if (tty2 && tty2 != tty)
+ int nested = 0;
+ if (tty2 && tty2 != tty) {
tty_lock(tty2);
- tty_lock(tty);
+ nested = SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING;
+ }
+ tty_lock_nested(tty, nested);
}
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(tty_lock_pair);
@@ -55,8 +64,13 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(tty_lock_pair);
void __lockfunc tty_unlock_pair(struct tty_struct *tty,
struct tty_struct *tty2)
{
- tty_unlock(tty);
- if (tty2 && tty2 != tty)
+ if (tty < tty2) {
tty_unlock(tty2);
+ tty_unlock(tty);
+ } else {
+ tty_unlock(tty);
+ if (tty2 && tty2 != tty)
+ tty_unlock(tty2);
+ }
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(tty_unlock_pair);
--
1.7.9.5
--
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