[PATCH v2 2/2] workqueue: re-add lockdep dependencies for flushing

[Johannes Berg]

From: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@xxxxxxxxx>

In flush_work(), we need to create a lockdep dependency so that
the following scenario is appropriately tagged as a problem:

  work_function()
  {
    mutex_lock(&mutex);
    ...
  }

  other_function()
  {
    mutex_lock(&mutex);
    flush_work(&work); // or cancel_work_sync(&work);
  }

This is a problem since the work might be running and be blocked
on trying to acquire the mutex.

Similarly, in flush_workqueue().

These were removed after cross-release partially caught these
problems, but now cross-release was reverted anyway. IMHO the
removal was erroneous anyway though, since lockdep should be
able to catch potential problems, not just actual ones, and
cross-release would only have caught the problem when actually
invoking wait_for_completion().

Fixes: fd1a5b04dfb8 ("workqueue: Remove now redundant lock acquisitions wrt. workqueue flushes")
Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@xxxxxxxxx>
---
 kernel/workqueue.c | 8 ++++++++
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)

diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index a6c2b823f348..60e80198c3df 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -2652,6 +2652,9 @@ void flush_workqueue(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
 	if (WARN_ON(!wq_online))
 		return;
 
+	lock_map_acquire(&wq->lockdep_map);
+	lock_map_release(&wq->lockdep_map);
+
 	mutex_lock(&wq->mutex);
 
 	/*
@@ -2905,6 +2908,11 @@ static bool __flush_work(struct work_struct *work, bool from_cancel)
 	if (WARN_ON(!wq_online))
 		return false;
 
+	if (!from_cancel) {
+		lock_map_acquire(&work->lockdep_map);
+		lock_map_release(&work->lockdep_map);
+	}
+
 	if (start_flush_work(work, &barr, from_cancel)) {
 		wait_for_completion(&barr.done);
 		destroy_work_on_stack(&barr.work);
-- 
2.14.4