From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@microsoft.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] lockdep: Allow checking a read-only lock
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 17:33:10 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180117163310.GB2249@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180117151414.23686-1-willy@infradead.org>
On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 07:14:11AM -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> From: Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@microsoft.com>
>
> I am not for one moment suggesting that the concept of a read-only lock
> makes sense. You can't sensibly put one in ROM or in read-only mappings.
> What does make sense is some APIs want to specify a const pointer to
> indicate that they do not modify the object being pointed to. One example
> we have of this today is in the networking stack; tcp_md5_do_lookup takes
> a const struct sock * argument and wants to ensure that the caller either
> took the socket lock or the rcu lock.
>
> At the moment, tcp_md5_do_lookup() is actually lying to its callers;
> lockdep_sock_is_held() casts away the constness of the pointer because
> lockdep actually does modify the lock when checking whether it's held
> (under rare and unnecessary conditions).
>
> Fix this situation by (patch 1) only assigning a lock key on registration,
> not on check, (patch 2) marking the pointers in the lockdep check path
> as const and (patch 3) converting a few of the callers to themselves
> be const, removing the nasty hack in lockdep_sock_is_held().
>
Seems OK.
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Ingo can you make that happen?
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-17 16:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-17 15:14 Matthew Wilcox
2018-01-17 15:14 ` [PATCH 1/3] lockdep: Assign lock keys on registration Matthew Wilcox
2018-01-18 11:00 ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Matthew Wilcox
2018-01-17 15:14 ` [PATCH 2/3] lockdep: Make lockdep checking constant Matthew Wilcox
2018-01-18 11:01 ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Matthew Wilcox
2018-01-17 15:14 ` [PATCH 3/3] lockdep: Convert some users to const Matthew Wilcox
2018-01-18 11:01 ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Matthew Wilcox
2018-01-17 16:33 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
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=20180117163310.GB2249@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mawilcox@microsoft.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=willy@infradead.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®