[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 11:16:03 +0200
From: Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@...il.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
"Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
xfs <linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-block <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: false positive lockdep splat with loop device
On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 6:33 PM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:
> Does the patch below fix the warning for you?
>
> --
> From 28aae7104425433d39e6142adcd5b88dc5b0ad5f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
> Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2017 18:31:02 +0200
> Subject: block: use DECLARE_COMPLETION_ONSTACK in submit_bio_wait
>
> This way we get our lockdep annotations right in case multiple layers
> in the stack use submit_bio_wait.
>
> It also happens to simplify the code by getting rid of the submit_bio_ret
> structure.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
> ---
> block/bio.c | 19 +++++--------------
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/block/bio.c b/block/bio.c
> index 8338304ea256..4e18e959fc0a 100644
> --- a/block/bio.c
> +++ b/block/bio.c
> @@ -917,17 +917,9 @@ int bio_iov_iter_get_pages(struct bio *bio, struct iov_iter *iter)
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(bio_iov_iter_get_pages);
>
> -struct submit_bio_ret {
> - struct completion event;
> - int error;
> -};
> -
> static void submit_bio_wait_endio(struct bio *bio)
> {
> - struct submit_bio_ret *ret = bio->bi_private;
> -
> - ret->error = blk_status_to_errno(bio->bi_status);
> - complete(&ret->event);
> + complete(bio->bi_private);
> }
>
> /**
> @@ -943,16 +935,15 @@ static void submit_bio_wait_endio(struct bio *bio)
> */
> int submit_bio_wait(struct bio *bio)
> {
> - struct submit_bio_ret ret;
> + DECLARE_COMPLETION_ONSTACK(done);
>
> - init_completion(&ret.event);
> - bio->bi_private = &ret;
> + bio->bi_private = &done;
> bio->bi_end_io = submit_bio_wait_endio;
> bio->bi_opf |= REQ_SYNC;
> submit_bio(bio);
> - wait_for_completion_io(&ret.event);
> + wait_for_completion_io(&done);
>
> - return ret.error;
> + return blk_status_to_errno(bio->bi_status);
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(submit_bio_wait);
No, it doesn't -- the splat is a little bit more complicated, but
fundamentally the same thing.
Thanks,
Ilya
View attachment "pre.txt" of type "text/plain" (2948 bytes)
View attachment "post.txt" of type "text/plain" (3047 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists