Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1722698

Re: [RFC] workqueue: remove manual lockdep uses to detect deadlocks

Show all headers | View raw

On Sat, Aug 26, 2017 at 12:49:26AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> > However, how would it distinguish things like flushing another work
> 
> I think it must be distinguished with what it actually waits for, e.i.
> completion
> variables instead of work or wq. I will make it next week and let you know.

So no. The existing annotations are strictly better than relying on
cross-release.

As you know the problem with cross-release is that it is timing
dependent. You need to actually observe the problematic sequence before
it can warn, and only the whole instance->class mapping saves us from
actually hitting the deadlock.

Cross-release can result in deadlocks without warnings. If you were to
run:

	mutex_lock(A);
					mutex_lock(A);
					complete(C);
	wait_for_completion(C);

You'd deadlock without issue. Only if we observe this:

	mutex_lock(A);
	wait_for_completion(C);
					mutex_lock(A);
					complete(C);

Where we acquire A after wait_for_completion() but before complete()
will we observe the deadlock.

The same would be true for using cross-release for workqueues as well,
something like:

					W:
					mutex_lock(A)

	mutex_lock(A)
	flush_work(W)

would go unreported whereas the current workqueue annotation will
generate a splat.


This does not mean cross-release isn't worth it, its better than nothing,
but its strictly weaker than traditional annotations.

So where a traditional annotation is possible, we should use them.

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: [RFC] workqueue: remove manual lockdep uses to detect deadlocks Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2017-08-25 15:40 +0200
  Re: [RFC] workqueue: remove manual lockdep uses to detect deadlocks Byungchul Park <max.byungchul.park@gmail.com> - 2017-08-25 17:50 +0200
    Re: [RFC] workqueue: remove manual lockdep uses to detect deadlocks Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-08-29 21:00 +0200
      Re: [RFC] workqueue: remove manual lockdep uses to detect deadlocks Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com> - 2017-08-30 04:00 +0200
        Re: [RFC] workqueue: remove manual lockdep uses to detect deadlocks Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-08-30 08:30 +0200
  Re: [RFC] workqueue: remove manual lockdep uses to detect deadlocks Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com> - 2017-08-29 02:30 +0200

csiph-web