1. 19 12月, 2017 2 次提交
  2. 17 12月, 2017 1 次提交
  3. 15 12月, 2017 6 次提交
  4. 13 12月, 2017 2 次提交
  5. 12 12月, 2017 3 次提交
    • I
      locking/lockdep: Remove the cross-release locking checks · e966eaee
      Ingo Molnar 提交于
      This code (CONFIG_LOCKDEP_CROSSRELEASE=y and CONFIG_LOCKDEP_COMPLETIONS=y),
      while it found a number of old bugs initially, was also causing too many
      false positives that caused people to disable lockdep - which is arguably
      a worse overall outcome.
      
      If we disable cross-release by default but keep the code upstream then
      in practice the most likely outcome is that we'll allow the situation
      to degrade gradually, by allowing entropy to introduce more and more
      false positives, until it overwhelms maintenance capacity.
      
      Another bad side effect was that people were trying to work around
      the false positives by uglifying/complicating unrelated code. There's
      a marked difference between annotating locking operations and
      uglifying good code just due to bad lock debugging code ...
      
      This gradual decrease in quality happened to a number of debugging
      facilities in the kernel, and lockdep is pretty complex already,
      so we cannot risk this outcome.
      
      Either cross-release checking can be done right with no false positives,
      or it should not be included in the upstream kernel.
      
      ( Note that it might make sense to maintain it out of tree and go through
        the false positives every now and then and see whether new bugs were
        introduced. )
      
      Cc: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
      Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
      Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
      Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
      Signed-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
      e966eaee
    • W
      locking/core: Remove break_lock field when CONFIG_GENERIC_LOCKBREAK=y · d89c7035
      Will Deacon 提交于
      When CONFIG_GENERIC_LOCKBEAK=y, locking structures grow an extra int ->break_lock
      field which is used to implement raw_spin_is_contended() by setting the field
      to 1 when waiting on a lock and clearing it to zero when holding a lock.
      However, there are a few problems with this approach:
      
        - There is a write-write race between a CPU successfully taking the lock
          (and subsequently writing break_lock = 0) and a waiter waiting on
          the lock (and subsequently writing break_lock = 1). This could result
          in a contended lock being reported as uncontended and vice-versa.
      
        - On machines with store buffers, nothing guarantees that the writes
          to break_lock are visible to other CPUs at any particular time.
      
        - READ_ONCE/WRITE_ONCE are not used, so the field is potentially
          susceptible to harmful compiler optimisations,
      
      Consequently, the usefulness of this field is unclear and we'd be better off
      removing it and allowing architectures to implement raw_spin_is_contended() by
      providing a definition of arch_spin_is_contended(), as they can when
      CONFIG_GENERIC_LOCKBREAK=n.
      Signed-off-by: NWill Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
      Acked-by: NPeter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
      Cc: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
      Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      Cc: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
      Cc: Sebastian Ott <sebott@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
      Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
      Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1511894539-7988-3-git-send-email-will.deacon@arm.comSigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
      d89c7035
    • W
      locking/core: Fix deadlock during boot on systems with GENERIC_LOCKBREAK · f87f3a32
      Will Deacon 提交于
      Commit:
      
        a8a217c2 ("locking/core: Remove {read,spin,write}_can_lock()")
      
      removed the definition of raw_spin_can_lock(), causing the GENERIC_LOCKBREAK
      spin_lock() routines to poll the ->break_lock field when waiting on a lock.
      
      This has been reported to cause a deadlock during boot on s390, because
      the ->break_lock field is also set by the waiters, and can potentially
      remain set indefinitely if no other CPUs come in to take the lock after
      it has been released.
      
      This patch removes the explicit spinning on ->break_lock from the waiters,
      instead relying on the outer trylock() operation to determine when the
      lock is available.
      Reported-by: NSebastian Ott <sebott@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
      Tested-by: NSebastian Ott <sebott@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
      Signed-off-by: NWill Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
      Acked-by: NPeter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
      Cc: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
      Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      Cc: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
      Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
      Fixes: a8a217c2 ("locking/core: Remove {read,spin,write}_can_lock()")
      Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1511894539-7988-2-git-send-email-will.deacon@arm.comSigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
      f87f3a32
  6. 11 12月, 2017 3 次提交
  7. 07 12月, 2017 5 次提交
  8. 06 12月, 2017 1 次提交
  9. 05 12月, 2017 6 次提交
  10. 04 12月, 2017 5 次提交
  11. 01 12月, 2017 1 次提交
  12. 30 11月, 2017 1 次提交
  13. 29 11月, 2017 1 次提交
  14. 28 11月, 2017 3 次提交