From: Xiongwei Song <sxwjean@me.com>
To: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, will@kernel.org,
longman@redhat.com, boqun.feng@gmail.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Xiongwei Song <sxwjean@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH v3] locking/lockdep: Fix meaningless usages output of lock classes
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2021 21:59:16 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210629135916.308210-1-sxwjean@me.com> (raw)
From: Xiongwei Song <sxwjean@gmail.com>
When enabling CONFIG_LOCK_STAT, then CONFIG_LOCKDEP is forcedly enabled.
We can get output from /proc/lockdep, which currently includes usages of
lock classes. But the usages are meaningless, see the output below:
/ # cat /proc/lockdep
all lock classes:
ffffffff9af63350 ....: cgroup_mutex
ffffffff9af54eb8 ....: (console_sem).lock
ffffffff9af54e60 ....: console_lock
ffffffff9ae74c38 ....: console_owner_lock
ffffffff9ae74c80 ....: console_owner
ffffffff9ae66e60 ....: cpu_hotplug_lock
Only one usage context for each lock, this is because each usage is only
changed in mark_lock() that is in CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING defined section,
however in the test situation, it's not.
The fix is to move the usages reading and seq_print from
CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING undefined setcion to its defined section. Also,
locks_after list of lock_class is empty when CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING
undefined, so do the same thing as what have done for usages of lock
classes.
With this patch with CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING undefined, we can get the
results below:
/ # cat /proc/lockdep
all lock classes:
ffffffff85163290: cgroup_mutex
ffffffff85154dd8: (console_sem).lock
ffffffff85154d80: console_lock
ffffffff85074b58: console_owner_lock
ffffffff85074ba0: console_owner
ffffffff85066d60: cpu_hotplug_lock
a class key and the relevant class name each line.
Signed-off-by: Xiongwei Song <sxwjean@gmail.com>
---
v3: Improve commit log. Thank Longman very much for the comments.
v2: https://lkml.org/lkml/2021/6/28/1549
---
kernel/locking/lockdep_proc.c | 26 ++++++++++++++------------
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep_proc.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep_proc.c
index 806978314496..b8d9a050c337 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/lockdep_proc.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep_proc.c
@@ -70,26 +70,28 @@ static int l_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCKDEP
seq_printf(m, " OPS:%8ld", debug_class_ops_read(class));
#endif
-#ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING
- seq_printf(m, " FD:%5ld", lockdep_count_forward_deps(class));
- seq_printf(m, " BD:%5ld", lockdep_count_backward_deps(class));
-#endif
+ if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING)) {
+ seq_printf(m, " FD:%5ld", lockdep_count_forward_deps(class));
+ seq_printf(m, " BD:%5ld", lockdep_count_backward_deps(class));
- get_usage_chars(class, usage);
- seq_printf(m, " %s", usage);
+ get_usage_chars(class, usage);
+ seq_printf(m, " %s", usage);
+ }
seq_printf(m, ": ");
print_name(m, class);
seq_puts(m, "\n");
- list_for_each_entry(entry, &class->locks_after, entry) {
- if (entry->distance == 1) {
- seq_printf(m, " -> [%p] ", entry->class->key);
- print_name(m, entry->class);
- seq_puts(m, "\n");
+ if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING)) {
+ list_for_each_entry(entry, &class->locks_after, entry) {
+ if (entry->distance == 1) {
+ seq_printf(m, " -> [%p] ", entry->class->key);
+ print_name(m, entry->class);
+ seq_puts(m, "\n");
+ }
}
+ seq_puts(m, "\n");
}
- seq_puts(m, "\n");
return 0;
}
--
2.30.2
next reply other threads:[~2021-06-29 13:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-29 13:59 Xiongwei Song [this message]
2021-06-29 14:02 ` Waiman Long
2021-07-05 7:53 ` [tip: locking/urgent] " tip-bot2 for Xiongwei Song
2021-07-05 9:05 ` [tip: locking/urgent] locking/lockdep: Fix meaningless /proc/lockdep output of lock classes on !CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING tip-bot2 for 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=20210629135916.308210-1-sxwjean@me.com \
--to=sxwjean@me.com \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sxwjean@gmail.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®