Re: cred_guard_mutex vs seq_file::lock [was: Re: 3.14.0+/x86: lockdep and mutexes not getting along]

[Al Viro]

On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 03:50:27PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > Al, David, any bright ideas on how to best fix this?
> 
> Have the seq_xxx() code throw an error if current->in_execve is true.  I can't
> think of any circumstance where execve() should be reading anything that uses
> seq_xxx().

*cringe*

I don't like it.  That really should be a responsiblity of specific ->show();
"I'm going to take that mutex, bugger off if we are in execve()" makes a lot
more sense than having e.g. seq_read() care of that.  IOW, I would very
much prefer the patch you've sent last week.

And yes, it might leave lockdep false positives, but that's better dealt with
by annotating the sucker ("this guy has a separate lockdep class for its
->lock").  E.g. by splitting proc_single_file_operations in two and having
the one used for those files do lockdep_set_class() in its ->open().
--
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/