[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20210511150734.3492-1-glittao@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2021 17:07:32 +0200
From: glittao@...il.com
To: brendanhiggins@...gle.com, cl@...ux.com, penberg@...nel.org,
rientjes@...gle.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@....com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, vbabka@...e.cz
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
kunit-dev@...glegroups.com, linux-mm@...ck.org, elver@...gle.com,
dlatypov@...gle.com, Oliver Glitta <glittao@...il.com>
Subject: [PATCH v5 1/3] kunit: make test->lock irq safe
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
The upcoming SLUB kunit test will be calling kunit_find_named_resource() from
a context with disabled interrupts. That means kunit's test->lock needs to be
IRQ safe to avoid potential deadlocks and lockdep splats.
This patch therefore changes the test->lock usage to spin_lock_irqsave()
and spin_unlock_irqrestore().
Signed-off-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Signed-off-by: Oliver Glitta <glittao@...il.com>
---
Changes since v4
Rebased whole series on 5.13-rc1
include/kunit/test.h | 5 +++--
lib/kunit/test.c | 18 +++++++++++-------
2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/kunit/test.h b/include/kunit/test.h
index 49601c4b98b8..524d4789af22 100644
--- a/include/kunit/test.h
+++ b/include/kunit/test.h
@@ -515,8 +515,9 @@ kunit_find_resource(struct kunit *test,
void *match_data)
{
struct kunit_resource *res, *found = NULL;
+ unsigned long flags;
- spin_lock(&test->lock);
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&test->lock, flags);
list_for_each_entry_reverse(res, &test->resources, node) {
if (match(test, res, (void *)match_data)) {
@@ -526,7 +527,7 @@ kunit_find_resource(struct kunit *test,
}
}
- spin_unlock(&test->lock);
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&test->lock, flags);
return found;
}
diff --git a/lib/kunit/test.c b/lib/kunit/test.c
index 2f6cc0123232..45f068864d76 100644
--- a/lib/kunit/test.c
+++ b/lib/kunit/test.c
@@ -475,6 +475,7 @@ int kunit_add_resource(struct kunit *test,
void *data)
{
int ret = 0;
+ unsigned long flags;
res->free = free;
kref_init(&res->refcount);
@@ -487,10 +488,10 @@ int kunit_add_resource(struct kunit *test,
res->data = data;
}
- spin_lock(&test->lock);
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&test->lock, flags);
list_add_tail(&res->node, &test->resources);
/* refcount for list is established by kref_init() */
- spin_unlock(&test->lock);
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&test->lock, flags);
return ret;
}
@@ -548,9 +549,11 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_alloc_and_get_resource);
void kunit_remove_resource(struct kunit *test, struct kunit_resource *res)
{
- spin_lock(&test->lock);
+ unsigned long flags;
+
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&test->lock, flags);
list_del(&res->node);
- spin_unlock(&test->lock);
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&test->lock, flags);
kunit_put_resource(res);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_remove_resource);
@@ -630,6 +633,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_kfree);
void kunit_cleanup(struct kunit *test)
{
struct kunit_resource *res;
+ unsigned long flags;
/*
* test->resources is a stack - each allocation must be freed in the
@@ -641,9 +645,9 @@ void kunit_cleanup(struct kunit *test)
* protect against the current node being deleted, not the next.
*/
while (true) {
- spin_lock(&test->lock);
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&test->lock, flags);
if (list_empty(&test->resources)) {
- spin_unlock(&test->lock);
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&test->lock, flags);
break;
}
res = list_last_entry(&test->resources,
@@ -654,7 +658,7 @@ void kunit_cleanup(struct kunit *test)
* resource, and this can't happen if the test->lock
* is held.
*/
- spin_unlock(&test->lock);
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&test->lock, flags);
kunit_remove_resource(test, res);
}
current->kunit_test = NULL;
--
2.31.1.272.g89b43f80a5
Powered by blists - more mailing lists