Re: [PATCH RESEND] lockdep: Pass lockdep expression to RCU lists

From: Peter Zijlstra
Date: Mon Feb 17 2020 - 10:12:54 EST


On Sun, Feb 16, 2020 at 01:16:36PM +0530, Amol Grover wrote:
> Data is traversed using hlist_for_each_entry_rcu outside an
> RCU read-side critical section but under the protection
> of either lockdep_lock or with irqs disabled.
>
> Hence, add corresponding lockdep expression to silence false-positive
> lockdep warnings, and harden RCU lists. Also add macro for
> corresponding lockdep expression.
>
> Two things to note:
> - RCU traversals protected under both, irqs disabled and
> graph lock, have both the checks in the lockdep expression.
> - RCU traversals under the protection of just disabled irqs
> don't have a corresponding lockdep expression as it is implicitly
> checked for.
>
> Signed-off-by: Amol Grover <frextrite@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 21 +++++++++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> index 32282e7112d3..696ad5d4daed 100644
> --- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> +++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> @@ -85,6 +85,8 @@ module_param(lock_stat, int, 0644);
> * code to recurse back into the lockdep code...
> */
> static arch_spinlock_t lockdep_lock = (arch_spinlock_t)__ARCH_SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED;
> +#define graph_lock_held() \
> + arch_spin_is_locked(&lockdep_lock)
> static struct task_struct *lockdep_selftest_task_struct;
>
> static int graph_lock(void)
> @@ -1009,7 +1011,7 @@ static bool __check_data_structures(void)
> /* Check the chain_key of all lock chains. */
> for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(chainhash_table); i++) {
> head = chainhash_table + i;
> - hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(chain, head, entry) {
> + hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(chain, head, entry, graph_lock_held()) {
> if (!check_lock_chain_key(chain))
> return false;
> }

URGH.. this patch combines two horribles to create a horrific :/

- spin_is_locked() is an abomination
- this RCU list stuff is just plain annoying

I'm tempted to do something like:

#define STFU (true)

hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(chain, head, entry, STFU) {

Paul, are we going a little over-board with this stuff? Do we really
have to annotate all of this?