On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 07:22:37PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Samuel Ortiz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 02:50:03 +0200
>
> > On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 04:49:21PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> > > I would strongly caution against adding any run-time overhead just to
> > > cure a false lockdep warning. Even adding a new function argument
> > > is too much IMHO.
> > >
> > > Make the cost show up for lockdep only, perhaps by putting each
> > > hashbin lock into a seperate locking class?
> > Does that look better to you:
>
> Yes, it does.:)
Unfortunately, it doesn't work, as the lock key is not on the stack. We get
hit by the lockdep code checking if our lock key is static:
if (!static_obj(key)) {
printk("BUG: key %p not in .data!\n", key);
DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(1);
return;
}
So, instead, I propose the following, which does work, and adds runtime
overhead only when LOCKDEP is enabled:
---
net/irda/irqueue.c | 9 ++++++++-
1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/irda/irqueue.c b/net/irda/irqueue.c
index 9266233..d058b46 100644
--- a/net/irda/irqueue.c
+++ b/net/irda/irqueue.c
@@ -384,6 +384,9 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(hashbin_new);
* for deallocating this structure if it's complex. If not the user can
* just supply kfree, which should take care of the job.
*/
+#ifdef CONFIG_LOCKDEP
+static int hashbin_lock_depth = 0;
+#endif
int hashbin_delete( hashbin_t* hashbin, FREE_FUNC free_func)
{
irda_queue_t* queue;
@@ -395,7 +398,8 @@ int hashbin_delete( hashbin_t* hashbin, FREE_FUNC free_func)
/* Synchronize */
if ( hashbin->hb_type & HB_LOCK ) {
- spin_lock_irqsave(&hashbin->hb_spinlock, flags);
+ spin_lock_irqsave_nested(&hashbin->hb_spinlock, flags,
+ hashbin_lock_depth++);
}
/*
@@ -419,6 +423,9 @@ int hashbin_delete( hashbin_t* hashbin, FREE_FUNC free_func)
/* Release lock */
if ( hashbin->hb_type & HB_LOCK) {
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&hashbin->hb_spinlock, flags);
+#ifdef CONFIG_LOCKDEP
+ hashbin_lock_depth--;
+#endif
}
/*
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
