mirror of
https://github.com/Fishwaldo/Star64_linux.git
synced 2025-06-22 22:51:37 +00:00
locking/lockdep: Untangle xhlock history save/restore from task independence
Where XHLOCK_{SOFT,HARD} are save/restore points in the xhlocks[] to ensure the temporal IRQ events don't interact with task state, the XHLOCK_PROC is a fundament different beast that just happens to share the interface. The purpose of XHLOCK_PROC is to annotate independent execution inside one task. For example workqueues, each work should appear to run in its own 'pristine' 'task'. Remove XHLOCK_PROC in favour of its own interface to avoid confusion. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: boqun.feng@gmail.com Cc: david@fromorbit.com Cc: johannes@sipsolutions.net Cc: kernel-team@lge.com Cc: oleg@redhat.com Cc: tj@kernel.org Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170829085939.ggmb6xiohw67micb@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
7b3d61cc73
commit
f52be57080
4 changed files with 48 additions and 51 deletions
|
@ -2094,8 +2094,8 @@ __acquires(&pool->lock)
|
|||
lock_map_acquire(&pwq->wq->lockdep_map);
|
||||
lock_map_acquire(&lockdep_map);
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Strictly speaking we should do start(PROC) without holding any
|
||||
* locks, that is, before these two lock_map_acquire()'s.
|
||||
* Strictly speaking we should mark the invariant state without holding
|
||||
* any locks, that is, before these two lock_map_acquire()'s.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* However, that would result in:
|
||||
*
|
||||
|
@ -2107,14 +2107,14 @@ __acquires(&pool->lock)
|
|||
* Which would create W1->C->W1 dependencies, even though there is no
|
||||
* actual deadlock possible. There are two solutions, using a
|
||||
* read-recursive acquire on the work(queue) 'locks', but this will then
|
||||
* hit the lockdep limitation on recursive locks, or simly discard
|
||||
* hit the lockdep limitation on recursive locks, or simply discard
|
||||
* these locks.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* AFAICT there is no possible deadlock scenario between the
|
||||
* flush_work() and complete() primitives (except for single-threaded
|
||||
* workqueues), so hiding them isn't a problem.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
crossrelease_hist_start(XHLOCK_PROC, true);
|
||||
lockdep_invariant_state(true);
|
||||
trace_workqueue_execute_start(work);
|
||||
worker->current_func(work);
|
||||
/*
|
||||
|
@ -2122,7 +2122,6 @@ __acquires(&pool->lock)
|
|||
* point will only record its address.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
trace_workqueue_execute_end(work);
|
||||
crossrelease_hist_end(XHLOCK_PROC);
|
||||
lock_map_release(&lockdep_map);
|
||||
lock_map_release(&pwq->wq->lockdep_map);
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue