linux-kernel - [PATCH 2/5] locking/lockdep: Eliminate redundant irqs check in __lock

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1538157201-29173-3-git-send-email-longman@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 28 Sep 2018 13:53:18 -0400
From:   Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Subject: [PATCH 2/5] locking/lockdep: Eliminate redundant irqs check in __lock_acquire()

The static __lock_acquire() function has only two callers:

 1) lock_acquire()
 2) reacquire_held_locks()

In lock_acquire(), raw_local_irq_save() is called before hand. So
irqs must have been disabled. So the check

	DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(!irqs_disabled())

is kind of redundant in thise case. So move the above check
to reacquire_held_locks() to eliminate redundant code in the
lock_acquire path.

Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
---
 kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 15 +++++++--------
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
index 8f9de7c..add0468 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
@@ -3192,6 +3192,10 @@ void lockdep_init_map(struct lockdep_map *lock, const char *name,
 /*
  * This gets called for every mutex_lock*()/spin_lock*() operation.
  * We maintain the dependency maps and validate the locking attempt:
+ *
+ * The callers must make sure that IRQs are disabled before calling it.
+ * otherwise we could get an interrupt which would want to take locks,
+ * which would end up in lockdep again.
  */
 static int __lock_acquire(struct lockdep_map *lock, unsigned int subclass,
 			  int trylock, int read, int check, int hardirqs_off,
@@ -3209,14 +3213,6 @@ static int __lock_acquire(struct lockdep_map *lock, unsigned int subclass,
 	if (unlikely(!debug_locks))
 		return 0;
 
-	/*
-	 * Lockdep should run with IRQs disabled, otherwise we could
-	 * get an interrupt which would want to take locks, which would
-	 * end up in lockdep and have you got a head-ache already?
-	 */
-	if (DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(!irqs_disabled()))
-		return 0;
-
 	if (!prove_locking || lock->key == &__lockdep_no_validate__)
 		check = 0;
 
@@ -3473,6 +3469,9 @@ static int reacquire_held_locks(struct task_struct *curr, unsigned int depth,
 {
 	struct held_lock *hlock;
 
+	if (DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(!irqs_disabled()))
+		return 0;
+
 	for (hlock = curr->held_locks + idx; idx < depth; idx++, hlock++) {
 		if (!__lock_acquire(hlock->instance,
 				    hlock_class(hlock)->subclass,
-- 
1.8.3.1