[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1f1691cd-fcc8-4a0b-9d63-bff15c5a52ad@acm.org>
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2024 13:24:48 -0800
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Cc: Zhiguo Niu <zhiguo.niu@...soc.com>, peterz@...radead.org,
mingo@...hat.com, will@...nel.org, longman@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, niuzhiguo84@...il.com, ke.wang@...soc.com,
xuewen.yan@...soc.com, Carlos Llamas <cmllamas@...gle.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] lockdep: fix deadlock issue between lockdep and rcu
On 2/1/24 11:48, Boqun Feng wrote:
> raw_spin_lock_irqsave():
> lock_acquire():
> __lock_acquire():
> validate_chain():
> lookup_chain_cache_add():
> graph_lock();
>
> Basically, every lock acquisition may lock the lockdep graph because
> of dependency checking.
Wouldn't it be simpler to make __lock_acquire() return early if
this_cpu_read(lockdep_recursion) indicates that the graph lock is held?
Thanks,
Bart.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists