Re: [PATCH v8 00/14] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

2017-08-17 Thread Boqun Feng
On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 10:12:24AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Boqun Feng wrote: > > > > BTW., I don't think the #ifdef is necessary: lockdep_init_map_crosslock > > > should map > > > to nothing when lockdep is disabled, right? > > > > IIUC, lockdep_init_map_crosslock is only defined when

Re: [PATCH v8 00/14] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

2017-08-17 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Boqun Feng wrote: > > BTW., I don't think the #ifdef is necessary: lockdep_init_map_crosslock > > should map > > to nothing when lockdep is disabled, right? > > IIUC, lockdep_init_map_crosslock is only defined when > CONFIG_LOCKDEP_CROSSRELEASE=y, Then lockdep_init_map_crosslock() should b

Re: [PATCH v8 00/14] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

2017-08-17 Thread Boqun Feng
On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 09:48:11AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Boqun Feng wrote: > > > --- a/kernel/workqueue.c > > +++ b/kernel/workqueue.c > > @@ -2431,6 +2431,27 @@ struct wq_barrier { > > struct task_struct *task; /* purely informational */ > > }; > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_LOCK

Re: [PATCH v8 00/14] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

2017-08-17 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Boqun Feng wrote: > --- a/kernel/workqueue.c > +++ b/kernel/workqueue.c > @@ -2431,6 +2431,27 @@ struct wq_barrier { > struct task_struct *task; /* purely informational */ > }; > > +#ifdef CONFIG_LOCKDEP_COMPLETE > +# define INIT_WQ_BARRIER_ONSTACK(barr, func, target)

Re: [PATCH v8 00/14] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

2017-08-16 Thread Byungchul Park
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 05:06:23PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 04:14:21PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 01:58:08PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > > > > I'm not sure this caused the lockdep warning but, if they belongs to the > > > > same class even

Re: [PATCH v8 00/14] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

2017-08-16 Thread Byungchul Park
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 04:14:21PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 01:58:08PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > > > I'm not sure this caused the lockdep warning but, if they belongs to the > > > same class even though they couldn't be the same instance as you said, I > > > also thin

Re: [PATCH v8 00/14] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

2017-08-16 Thread Byungchul Park
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 01:58:08PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > > I'm not sure this caused the lockdep warning but, if they belongs to the > > same class even though they couldn't be the same instance as you said, I > > also think that is another problem and should be fixed. > > > > My point was mo

Re: [PATCH v8 00/14] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

2017-08-15 Thread Byungchul Park
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 01:40:51PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > > > > Worker A : acquired of wfc.work -> wait for cpu_hotplug_lock to be > > > > released > > > > Task B : acquired of cpu_hotplug_lock -> wait for lock#3 to be > > > > released > > > > Task C : acquired of lock#3 -> wait for compl

Re: [PATCH v8 00/14] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

2017-08-15 Thread Boqun Feng
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 02:05:06PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 12:05:31PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > > > I see... > > > > > > Worker A : acquired of wfc.work -> wait for cpu_hotplug_lock to be > > > released > > > Task B : acquired of cpu_hotplug_lock -> wait for lock

Re: [PATCH v8 00/14] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

2017-08-15 Thread Boqun Feng
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 01:37:46PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 12:05:31PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 09:16:37AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:20:20AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > > > So with the latest fi

Re: [PATCH v8 00/14] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

2017-08-15 Thread Byungchul Park
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 12:05:31PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > > I see... > > > > Worker A : acquired of wfc.work -> wait for cpu_hotplug_lock to be released > > Task B : acquired of cpu_hotplug_lock -> wait for lock#3 to be released > > Task C : acquired of lock#3 -> wait for completion of bar

Re: [PATCH v8 00/14] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

2017-08-15 Thread Byungchul Park
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 12:05:31PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 09:16:37AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:20:20AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > So with the latest fixes there's a new lockdep warning on one of my > > > testboxes: > > > >

Re: [PATCH v8 00/14] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

2017-08-15 Thread Boqun Feng
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 09:16:37AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:20:20AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > So with the latest fixes there's a new lockdep warning on one of my > > testboxes: > > > > [ 11.322487] EXT4-fs (sda2): mounted filesystem with ordered data mo

Re: [PATCH v8 00/14] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

2017-08-15 Thread Byungchul Park
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:20:20AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > So with the latest fixes there's a new lockdep warning on one of my testboxes: > > [ 11.322487] EXT4-fs (sda2): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. > Opts: (null) > > [ 11.495661] ===

Re: [PATCH v8 00/14] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

2017-08-15 Thread Ingo Molnar
So with the latest fixes there's a new lockdep warning on one of my testboxes: [ 11.322487] EXT4-fs (sda2): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. Opts: (null) [ 11.495661] == [ 11.502093] WARNING: possible circular locking dependenc

Re: [PATCH v8 00/14] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

2017-08-14 Thread Byungchul Park
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 12:57:48PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Byungchul Park wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 01:10:19PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > * Byungchul Park wrote: > > > > > > > Change from v7 > > > > - rebase on latest tip/sched/core (Jul 26 2017) > > > >

Re: [PATCH v8 00/14] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

2017-08-14 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Byungchul Park wrote: > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 01:10:19PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Byungchul Park wrote: > > > > > Change from v7 > > > - rebase on latest tip/sched/core (Jul 26 2017) > > > - apply peterz's suggestions > > > - simplify code of crossrelease_{hist/soft/hard}

Re: [PATCH v8 00/14] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

2017-08-10 Thread Byungchul Park
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 01:10:19PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Byungchul Park wrote: > > > Change from v7 > > - rebase on latest tip/sched/core (Jul 26 2017) > > - apply peterz's suggestions > > - simplify code of crossrelease_{hist/soft/hard}_{start/end} > > - exclude a patc

Re: [PATCH v8 00/14] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

2017-08-10 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Byungchul Park wrote: > Change from v7 > - rebase on latest tip/sched/core (Jul 26 2017) > - apply peterz's suggestions > - simplify code of crossrelease_{hist/soft/hard}_{start/end} > - exclude a patch avoiding redundant links > - exclude a patch already applied

Re: [PATCH v8 00/14] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

2017-08-10 Thread Byungchul Park
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 09:55:56AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 05:50:59PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > > Heh, look what it does... > > It does not happen in my machine.. > > I tihink it happens because of "Simplify xhlock ring buffer invalidation" > patch of

Re: [PATCH v8 00/14] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

2017-08-10 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 06:37:07PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 05:50:59PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > > Heh, look what it does... > > Wait.. execuse me but.. is it a real problem? I've not tried again with my patch removed -- I'm chasing another issue atm.

Re: [PATCH v8 00/14] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

2017-08-10 Thread Byungchul Park
On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 05:50:59PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > Heh, look what it does... Wait.. execuse me but.. is it a real problem? > > > 4== > 4WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected > 4.13.0-rc2-00317-gadc6764a3ad

Re: [PATCH v8 00/14] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

2017-08-09 Thread Byungchul Park
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 09:55:56AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 05:50:59PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > > Heh, look what it does... > > It does not happen in my machine.. > > I tihink it happens because of "Simplify xhlock ring buffer invalidation" > patch of

Re: [PATCH v8 00/14] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

2017-08-09 Thread Byungchul Park
On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 05:50:59PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > Heh, look what it does... It does not happen in my machine.. I tihink it happens because of "Simplify xhlock ring buffer invalidation" patch of you. First of all, could you reverse yours and check if it happens, too? If not,

Re: [PATCH v8 00/14] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

2017-08-09 Thread Peter Zijlstra
Heh, look what it does... 4== 4WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected 4.13.0-rc2-00317-gadc6764a3adf-dirty #797 Tainted: GW 4-- 4startpar/582 is trying to acquir