Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] regmap: add configurable lock class key for lockdep

From: Lars-Peter Clausen
Date: Mon Jun 29 2015 - 09:00:28 EST


On 06/29/2015 02:51 PM, Nicolas Boichat wrote:
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Nicolas Boichat <drinkcat@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 12:08 AM, Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[...]
As far as I can tell we're likely to end up needing a key per regmap or
something similar.

Since the number of lockdep classes itself is also limited we should avoid
creating extra lockdep classes when we can. I think the approach which
having the option of specifying a lockdep class in the regmap config will be
ok. The only case it can't handle if we nest instances with the same config,
but I don't really see valid use scases for that at the moment.

Oh, ffs. This just keeps getting better. I hadn't been aware of that
limitation. We still have the problem that this needs to be something
users can understand rather than something that's just "define something
here in one of your drivers if you're running into problems with
spurious warnings" here. That's always been the biggest problem here
(once we got past the "what is this supposed to do in the first place?"
issues).

I found that V4L2 uses separate lockdep classes for each of their
v4l2_ctrl. This was introduced in 6cd247ef22e "[media] v4l2-ctrls:
eliminate lockdep false alarms for struct v4l2_ctrl_handler.lock"
(https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=6cd247ef22e),
so we could possibly take that approach.

On my system, I have:
# cat /proc/lockdep_stats
lock-classes: 1241 [max: 8191]
direct dependencies: 7364 [max: 32768]
indirect dependencies: 27686
all direct dependencies: 158097
dependency chains: 10011 [max: 65536]
dependency chain hlocks: 38887 [max: 327680]
in-hardirq chains: 92
in-softirq chains: 372
in-process chains: 9547
stack-trace entries: 107703 [max: 524288]

So, at least on that platform, there is some room to grow...

I'm just afraid that implementing this may require creating a bunch of
macros to wrap all regmap_init_[i2c/spi/...] functions, as the lockdep
classes need to be statically allocated... Unless we find a different
solution than what V4L2 does.

Following up on this. Lars-Peter's comments also highlights that we
have no good way to figure out which regmap requires a separate maps,
no clear hierarchy we can know about in advance, so we should put each
regmap in its own class.

The main issue is that the keys need to be allocated statically. We
have 2 options to do this:

1. mutex_init and v4l2_ctrl_handler_init solve this issue by being a
preprocessor macro that first allocates a static lock_class_key, then
calls the real init function.
This is not so practical in the case of regmap, as we have 14
different init functions ([devm_]regmap_init[_bus_type]), that would
each require a wrapper.

2. Bus registration takes a different approach
(https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=be871b7e5):
struct bus_type (statically allocated for each bus) has a lock_key
member: "struct lock_class_key lock_key;".
In the context of regmaps, that would mean adding a "lock_key" member
to regmap_config. I did a quick implementation of this idea, and it
seems to work, without modification to the rt5677 driver. The only
issue with this is that regmap_config cannot be const anymore: we'd
need to remove the const specifier in all drivers that use regmaps.

Yeah, I though about that as well, but the problem is the regmap_config is only valid during regmap_init() and can for example be placed on the stack. In which case it won't work anymore.


Both alternatives would mean that all regmaps created from 1. the same
line of code, or 2. the same regmap_config, would share the same
class. That may not be an issue, however (do we have an example of
different regmaps created from the same line/config that need to call
each other?), and the custom mutex workaround is still available....

Any preference between a bunch of macros, and adding a non-const
member to regmap_config? Or maybe someone has a better idea?

Maybe we are just over-thinking this and should just add one key to each regmap instance. That solves the issue without requiring the any user interaction. The only downside is that it might impact the performance of lockdep and uses quite a few lock classes. Its probably manageable right now but could grow into a problem as regmap adoption further progresses. But maybe we can leave the hard work of figuring a better solution to our future selves.

- Lars

--
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/