Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1575991
| From | Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] locking/spinlock_debug: Change it to a mostly fair lock |
| Date | 2017-02-07 20:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <t8jW2-74w-39@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <t6qoW-58b-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <t89Dk-vJ-19@gated-at.bofh.it> <t8azn-16x-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | Red Hat |
On 02/07/2017 04:48 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote: > >> On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 09:15:26AM -0500, Waiman Long wrote: >>> v2->v3: >>> - Keep the original v1 patches but move patch 3 of v2 in front so >>> as to disable GENERIC_LOCKBREAK when DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC is on. >>> >>> v1->v2: >>> - Pack lockup and break_lock into a single 4-byte slot so as not >>> to in increase spinlock size when GENERIC_LOCKBREAK is >>> on. Hopefully that will be enough to fix a frame size too large >>> warning in 0-day build. >>> - Add a new patch to disable GENERIC_LOCKBREAK when DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC >>> is on. >>> >>> The current debug spinlock implementation is a TATAS unfair lock. This >>> can occasionally lead to system lockup with a debug kernel because >>> of the unfairness of the lock rather than inherent locking problem. >>> >>> This patch set changes the debug spinlock implementation to a >>> mostly fair spinlock based on the MCS lock similar to what is done >>> in qspinlock. It also includes a patch that disable GENERIC_LOCKBREAK >>> when DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC is on. >> >> An alternative is to just delete the thing entirely.. >> >> Ingo, much of what this thing does seems to be superseded by both >> lockdep and a reliable NMI watchdog. Is there still value in >> spinlock_debug? > So there's still early stages when the NMI watchdog is not running, and > spinlock-debug can detect lockups in raw locks that lockdep does not cover, right? > > But yeah ... it would simplify things all around, so I'm not unsympathetic to the > idea... > > I've Cc:-ed a few other locking gents. > > Thanks, > > Ingo I have no problem deleting the debug_spinlock code entirely. I can update the patch to delete the code if you guys think that is the right thing to do. Cheers, Longman
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH v3 0/3] locking/spinlock_debug: Change it to a mostly fair lock Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com> - 2017-02-02 15:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] locking/spinlock_debug: Change it to a mostly fair lock Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-02-07 09:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] locking/spinlock_debug: Change it to a mostly fair lock Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2017-02-07 10:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] locking/spinlock_debug: Change it to a mostly fair lock Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com> - 2017-02-07 20:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] locking/spinlock_debug: Change it to a mostly fair lock "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-02-07 21:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] locking/spinlock_debug: Change it to a mostly fair lock Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-02-08 10:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] locking/spinlock_debug: Change it to a mostly fair lock "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-02-08 14:20 +0100
csiph-web