[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170131142637.GP6515@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 15:26:37 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>, "J. R. Okajima" <hooanon05g@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, darrick.wong@...cle.com,
david@...morbit.com, dave@...olabs.net
Subject: Re: Q: lockdep_assert_held_read() after downgrade_write()
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 09:23:08AM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 01/31/2017 06:25 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > @@ -40,8 +40,10 @@ static inline void rwsem_set_reader_owned(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
> > * do a write to the rwsem cacheline when it is really necessary
> > * to minimize cacheline contention.
> > */
> > - if (sem->owner != RWSEM_READER_OWNED)
> > + if (sem->owner != RWSEM_READER_OWNED) {
> > + WARN_ON_ONCE(sem->owner != current);
> > WRITE_ONCE(sem->owner, RWSEM_READER_OWNED);
> > + }
> > }
> >
> > static inline bool rwsem_owner_is_writer(struct task_struct *owner)
>
> I don't think you can do a WARN_ON_ONCE() check for sem->owner !=
> current here. If the rwsem starts from an unlock state, sem->owner will
> be NULL and an incorrect warning message will be printed.
Argh, I only looked at the downgrade_write() user and forgot to look if
it was used elsewhere.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists