[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1904242148480.1762@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 21:51:05 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
kasan-dev@...glegroups.com,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@...il.com>,
iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@...e.de>,
David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>, Chris Mason <clm@...com>,
Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com>,
linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, dm-devel@...hat.com,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>,
Alasdair Kergon <agk@...hat.com>,
intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>,
Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch V2 18/29] lockdep: Move stack trace logic into
check_prev_add()
On Wed, 24 Apr 2019, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 10:41:37AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > There is only one caller of check_prev_add() which hands in a zeroed struct
> > stack trace and a function pointer to save_stack(). Inside check_prev_add()
> > the stack_trace struct is checked for being empty, which is always
> > true. Based on that one code path stores a stack trace which is unused. The
> > comment there does not make sense either. It's all leftovers from
> > historical lockdep code (cross release).
>
> I was more or less expecting a revert of:
>
> ce07a9415f26 ("locking/lockdep: Make check_prev_add() able to handle external stack_trace")
>
> And then I read the comment that went with the "static struct
> stack_trace trace" that got removed (in the above commit) and realized
> that your patch will consume more stack entries.
>
> The problem is when the held lock stack in check_prevs_add() has multple
> trylock entries on top, in that case we call check_prev_add() multiple
> times, and this patch will then save the exact same stack-trace multiple
> times, consuming static resources.
>
> Possibly we should copy what stackdepot does (but we cannot use it
> directly because stackdepot uses locks; but possible we can share bits),
> but that is a patch for another day I think.
>
> So while convoluted, perhaps we should retain this code for now.
Uurg, what a mess.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists