From: Lance Yang <lance.yang@linux.dev>
To: Waiman Long <llong@redhat.com>, peterz@infradead.org
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, will@kernel.org, boqun.feng@gmail.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Lance Yang <ioworker0@gmail.com>,
Zi Li <zi.li@linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [WARN] LOCKDEP: MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAIN_HLOCKS too low
Date: Tue, 27 May 2025 13:33:57 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <055a9abd-8137-4382-9830-551961cbcda2@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c0fb67e3-ebe0-45ec-9f61-a8cd5949cc42@redhat.com>
Hi Longman,
Thanks for looking into this!
On 2025/5/27 12:48, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 5/26/25 10:02 PM, Lance Yang wrote:
>> From: Lance Yang <lance.yang@linux.dev>
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> With CONFIG_LOCKDEP on, I got this warning during kernel builds:
>>
>> [Tue May 27 00:22:59 2025] BUG: MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAIN_HLOCKS too low!
[...]
>>
>> $ cat .config|grep CONFIG_LOCKDEP
>> CONFIG_LOCKDEP_SUPPORT=y
>> CONFIG_LOCKDEP=y
>> CONFIG_LOCKDEP_BITS=15
>> CONFIG_LOCKDEP_CHAINS_BITS=16
>> CONFIG_LOCKDEP_STACK_TRACE_BITS=19
>> CONFIG_LOCKDEP_STACK_TRACE_HASH_BITS=14
>> CONFIG_LOCKDEP_CIRCULAR_QUEUE_BITS=12
>>
>> Is it safe? Or could this be a real locking issue?
>
> The lock chains store the locking order of nested locks. The default
> value of 16 may be too low now as the kernel is becoming more complex in
> term of possible nested locking orders. Anyway, I would suggest upping
> the CONFIG_LOCKDEP_CHAIN_BITS to 17 or even 18 to prevent this kind of
> problem. In fact, the latest RHEL debug kernel sets
> CONFIG_LOCKDEP_CHAINS_BITS to 18.
Yes, makes sense to me. Bumping it to 18 sounds reasonable as the kernel
is getting more complex in terms of possible nested locking orders. It
uses a bit more memory, but keeping LOCKDEP working is worth it ;)
And if there are no objections, I’d be happy to send a patch making the
change.
Thanks,
Lance
>
> Cheers,
> Longman
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-27 5:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-27 2:02 Lance Yang
2025-05-27 4:48 ` Waiman Long
2025-05-27 5:33 ` Lance Yang [this message]
2025-05-27 5:53 ` Waiman Long
2025-05-27 11:59 ` Lance Yang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=055a9abd-8137-4382-9830-551961cbcda2@linux.dev \
--to=lance.yang@linux.dev \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=ioworker0@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=llong@redhat.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=zi.li@linux.dev \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®