From: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
To: Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] drm/i915: use might_lock_nested in get_pages annotation
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2019 18:37:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191104173720.2696-3-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191104173720.2696-1-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
So strictly speaking the existing annotation is also ok, because we
have a chain of
obj->mm.lock#I915_MM_GET_PAGES -> fs_reclaim -> obj->mm.lock
(the shrinker cannot get at an object while we're in get_pages, hence
this is safe). But it's confusing, so try to take the right subclass
of the lock.
This does a bit reduce our lockdep based checking, but then it's also
less fragile, in case we ever change the nesting around.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object.h | 36 +++++++++++-----------
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object.h
index edaf7126a84d..e5750d506cc9 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object.h
@@ -271,10 +271,27 @@ void __i915_gem_object_set_pages(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj,
int ____i915_gem_object_get_pages(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj);
int __i915_gem_object_get_pages(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj);
+enum i915_mm_subclass { /* lockdep subclass for obj->mm.lock/struct_mutex */
+ I915_MM_NORMAL = 0,
+ /*
+ * Only used by struct_mutex, when called "recursively" from
+ * direct-reclaim-esque. Safe because there is only every one
+ * struct_mutex in the entire system.
+ */
+ I915_MM_SHRINKER = 1,
+ /*
+ * Used for obj->mm.lock when allocating pages. Safe because the object
+ * isn't yet on any LRU, and therefore the shrinker can't deadlock on
+ * it. As soon as the object has pages, obj->mm.lock nests within
+ * fs_reclaim.
+ */
+ I915_MM_GET_PAGES = 1,
+};
+
static inline int __must_check
i915_gem_object_pin_pages(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj)
{
- might_lock(&obj->mm.lock);
+ might_lock_nested(&obj->mm.lock, I915_MM_GET_PAGES);
if (atomic_inc_not_zero(&obj->mm.pages_pin_count))
return 0;
@@ -317,23 +334,6 @@ i915_gem_object_unpin_pages(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj)
__i915_gem_object_unpin_pages(obj);
}
-enum i915_mm_subclass { /* lockdep subclass for obj->mm.lock/struct_mutex */
- I915_MM_NORMAL = 0,
- /*
- * Only used by struct_mutex, when called "recursively" from
- * direct-reclaim-esque. Safe because there is only every one
- * struct_mutex in the entire system.
- */
- I915_MM_SHRINKER = 1,
- /*
- * Used for obj->mm.lock when allocating pages. Safe because the object
- * isn't yet on any LRU, and therefore the shrinker can't deadlock on
- * it. As soon as the object has pages, obj->mm.lock nests within
- * fs_reclaim.
- */
- I915_MM_GET_PAGES = 1,
-};
-
int __i915_gem_object_put_pages(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj);
void i915_gem_object_truncate(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj);
void i915_gem_object_writeback(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj);
--
2.24.0.rc2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-04 17:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20191104173720.2696-1-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2019-11-04 17:37 ` [PATCH 2/3] lockdep: add might_lock_nested() Daniel Vetter
2019-11-04 17:37 ` Daniel Vetter [this message]
2019-11-05 9:02 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/3] drm/i915: use might_lock_nested in get_pages annotation Joonas Lahtinen
2019-08-20 8:19 [PATCH 1/3] drm/i915: Switch obj->mm.lock lockdep annotations on its head Daniel Vetter
2019-08-20 8:19 ` [PATCH 3/3] drm/i915: use might_lock_nested in get_pages annotation Daniel Vetter
2019-08-23 8:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=20191104173720.2696-3-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--to=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=daniel.vetter@intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--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®