mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Waiman Long <llong@redhat.com>
To: Xiongwei Song <sxwjean@me.com>,
	peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, will@kernel.org,
	boqun.feng@gmail.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Xiongwei Song <sxwjean@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 2/3] locking/lockdep: Unify the return values of check_wait_context()
Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2021 11:19:40 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <0e48f59d-a8fd-936c-c57f-976632f9cead@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210711141430.896595-2-sxwjean@me.com>

On 7/11/21 10:14 AM, Xiongwei Song wrote:
> From: Xiongwei Song <sxwjean@gmail.com>
>
> Unity the return values of check_wait_context() as check_prev_add(),
"Unify"?
> check_irq_usage(), etc. 1 means no bug, 0 means there is a bug.
>
> The return values of print_lock_invalid_wait_context() are unnecessary,
> remove them.
>
> Signed-off-by: Xiongwei Song <sxwjean@gmail.com>
> ---
>   kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 20 ++++++++++----------
>   1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> index bf1c00c881e4..8b50da42f2c6 100644
> --- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> +++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> @@ -4635,16 +4635,16 @@ static inline short task_wait_context(struct task_struct *curr)
>   	return LD_WAIT_MAX;
>   }
>   
> -static int
> +static void
>   print_lock_invalid_wait_context(struct task_struct *curr,
>   				struct held_lock *hlock)
>   {
>   	short curr_inner;
>   
>   	if (!debug_locks_off())
> -		return 0;
> +		return;
>   	if (debug_locks_silent)
> -		return 0;
> +		return;
>   
>   	pr_warn("\n");
>   	pr_warn("=============================\n");
> @@ -4664,8 +4664,6 @@ print_lock_invalid_wait_context(struct task_struct *curr,
>   
>   	pr_warn("stack backtrace:\n");
>   	dump_stack();
> -
> -	return 0;
>   }
>   
>   /*
> @@ -4691,7 +4689,7 @@ static int check_wait_context(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *next)
>   	int depth;
>   
>   	if (!next_inner || next->trylock)
> -		return 0;
> +		return 1;
>   
>   	if (!next_outer)
>   		next_outer = next_inner;
> @@ -4723,10 +4721,12 @@ static int check_wait_context(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *next)
>   		}
>   	}
>   
> -	if (next_outer > curr_inner)
> -		return print_lock_invalid_wait_context(curr, next);
> +	if (next_outer > curr_inner) {
> +		print_lock_invalid_wait_context(curr, next);
> +		return 0;
> +	}
>   
> -	return 0;
> +	return 1;
>   }
>   
>   #else /* CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING */
> @@ -4962,7 +4962,7 @@ static int __lock_acquire(struct lockdep_map *lock, unsigned int subclass,
>   #endif
>   	hlock->pin_count = pin_count;
>   
> -	if (check_wait_context(curr, hlock))
> +	if (!check_wait_context(curr, hlock))
>   		return 0;
>   
>   	/* Initialize the lock usage bit */

There is also another check_wait_context() in the "#else 
CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING" path that needs to be kept in sync. For clarity, 
maybe you should state the meaning of the return value in the comment 
above the function.

Cheers,
Longman

check_wait_context


  reply	other threads:[~2021-07-11 15:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-07-11 14:14 [RFC PATCH v1 1/3] locking/lockdep: Fix false warning " Xiongwei Song
2021-07-11 14:14 ` [RFC PATCH v1 2/3] locking/lockdep: Unify the return values " Xiongwei Song
2021-07-11 15:19   ` Waiman Long [this message]
2021-07-12  7:48     ` Xiongwei Song
2021-07-23  2:57   ` [locking/lockdep] e0a77a7a5a: WARNING:bad_unlock_balance_detected kernel test robot
2021-07-11 14:14 ` [PATCH v1 3/3] locking/lockdep,doc: Correct the max number of lock classes Xiongwei Song
2021-07-11 15:22   ` Waiman Long
2021-07-12  7:49     ` Xiongwei Song
2021-07-11 16:43 ` [RFC PATCH v1 1/3] locking/lockdep: Fix false warning of check_wait_context() Waiman Long
2021-07-12  8:18   ` Xiongwei Song
2021-07-12  8:50     ` Boqun Feng
2021-07-12  9:21       ` Xiongwei Song
2021-07-12 13:04     ` Waiman Long
2021-07-12 15:03       ` Xiongwei Song
2021-07-13  2:29       ` Xiongwei Song

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=0e48f59d-a8fd-936c-c57f-976632f9cead@redhat.com \
    --to=llong@redhat.com \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=sxwjean@gmail.com \
    --cc=sxwjean@me.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /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®