Commit 120adbbd authored by Waiman Long's avatar Waiman Long Committed by Zheng Zengkai
Browse files

locking/lockdep: Iterate lock_classes directly when reading lockdep files

stable inclusion
from stable-v5.10.110
commit ecd384c436fd57195a2d178d5b85ab7060e35866
bugzilla: https://gitee.com/openeuler/kernel/issues/I574AL

Reference: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/commit/?id=ecd384c436fd57195a2d178d5b85ab7060e35866



--------------------------------

[ Upstream commit fb7275ac ]

When dumping lock_classes information via /proc/lockdep, we can't take
the lockdep lock as the lock hold time is indeterminate. Iterating
over all_lock_classes without holding lock can be dangerous as there
is a slight chance that it may branch off to other lists leading to
infinite loop or even access invalid memory if changes are made to
all_lock_classes list in parallel.

To avoid this problem, iteration of lock classes is now done directly
on the lock_classes array itself. The lock_classes_in_use bitmap is
checked to see if the lock class is being used. To avoid iterating
the full array all the times, a new max_lock_class_idx value is added
to track the maximum lock_class index that is currently being used.

We can theoretically take the lockdep lock for iterating all_lock_classes
when other lockdep files (lockdep_stats and lock_stat) are accessed as
the lock hold time will be shorter for them. For consistency, they are
also modified to iterate the lock_classes array directly.

Signed-off-by: default avatarWaiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220211035526.1329503-2-longman@redhat.com


Signed-off-by: default avatarSasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: default avatarYu Liao <liaoyu15@huawei.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarWei Li <liwei391@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarZheng Zengkai <zhengzengkai@huawei.com>
parent 996e3e63
Loading
Loading
Loading
Loading
0% Loading or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Please to comment