Skip to content
Commit 383776fa authored by Thomas Gleixner's avatar Thomas Gleixner Committed by Ingo Molnar
Browse files

locking/lockdep: Handle statically initialized PER_CPU locks properly



If a PER_CPU struct which contains a spin_lock is statically initialized
via:

DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct foo, bla) = {
	.lock = __SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED(bla.lock)
};

then lockdep assigns a seperate key to each lock because the logic for
assigning a key to statically initialized locks is to use the address as
the key. With per CPU locks the address is obvioulsy different on each CPU.

That's wrong, because all locks should have the same key.

To solve this the following modifications are required:

 1) Extend the is_kernel/module_percpu_addr() functions to hand back the
    canonical address of the per CPU address, i.e. the per CPU address
    minus the per CPU offset.

 2) Check the lock address with these functions and if the per CPU check
    matches use the returned canonical address as the lock key, so all per
    CPU locks have the same key.

 3) Move the static_obj(key) check into look_up_lock_class() so this check
    can be avoided for statically initialized per CPU locks.  That's
    required because the canonical address fails the static_obj(key) check
    for obvious reasons.

Reported-by: default avatarMike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: default avatarThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
[ Merged Dan's fixups for !MODULES and !SMP into this patch. ]
Signed-off-by: default avatarSebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: default avatarPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Dan Murphy <dmurphy@ti.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170227143736.pectaimkjkan5kow@linutronix.de


Signed-off-by: default avatarIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
parent 6419c4af
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment