Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 7/7] rcu: Quiet RCU-lockdep warningsinvolving interrupt disabling

From: Peter Zijlstra
Date: Tue Dec 06 2011 - 05:28:18 EST


On Tue, 2011-12-06 at 10:52 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-12-06 at 09:26 +0800, Yong Zhang wrote:
>
> > Yeah, because we call might_sleep() in rt_mutex_lock() unconditionally.
> > But in this case the 'BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context
> > at *' is obviously false positive.
>
> Why can't this mutex acquisition not block?

Gaah!! I see, this 5342e269 patch is revolting.. guys that's really vile
don't do that!

I tried reading the RCU code but I gave up.. rcu_boost() does:

rt_mutex_init_proxy_locked();
raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore();
rt_mutex_lock();
rt_mutex_unlock();

vs rcu_read_unlock_special()'s RCU_READ_UNLOCK_BLOCKED branch:

rt_mutex_unlock();


The latter looks to be unbalanced because I can't actually find a
matching lock. Also, all of that is ran with IRQs enabled. So what's the
problem?


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/