Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 7/7] rcu: Quiet RCU-lockdep warningsinvolving interrupt disabling

[Yong Zhang]

On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 10:41:36AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sat, 2011-12-03 at 10:34 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > From: Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@xxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > RCU-lockdep will issue warnings given the following use pattern:
> > 
> > 	rcu_read_lock();
> > 	local_irq_disable();
> > 	rcu_read_unlock();
> > 	local_irq_enable();
> > 
> > However, this use pattern is legal except for the scheduler's runqueue
> > and priority-inheritance locks (and any other locks that the scheduler
> > might use during priority-inheritance operations).
> 
> So what does this patch do? Make it not complain when you do the above?

It suppose to not complain but it bring other complain :(

> How often does this pattern actually happen?

IIRC, we have just one which is cured by commit [a841796: signal: align
__lock_task_sighand() irq disabling and RCU]

> Can't be that often
> otherwise we'd have had more complaints, no?

Yeah,

So that also means we don't dedicated lock_class_key for mtx.wait_lock.

Thanks,
Yong
--
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/