On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 07:11:43PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> What do you think about the following patches doing it?

I was more thinking about something like so...

Also, I think I want to muck with struct stack_trace; the members:
max_nr_entries and skip are input arguments to save_stack_trace() and
bloat the structure for no reason.

---
diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
index 7c38f8f3d97b..f2df300a96ee 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
@@ -430,6 +430,21 @@ static int save_trace(struct stack_trace *trace)
        return 1;
 }
 
+static bool return_trace(struct stack_trace *trace)
+{
+       /*
+        * If @trace is the last trace generated by save_trace(), then we can
+        * return the entries by simply subtracting @nr_stack_trace_entries
+        * again.
+        */
+       if (trace->entries != stack_trace + nr_stack_trace_entries - 
trace->nr_entres)
+               return false;
+
+       nr_stack_trace_entries -= trace->nr_entries;
+       trace->entries = NULL;
+       return true;
+}
+
 unsigned int nr_hardirq_chains;
 unsigned int nr_softirq_chains;
 unsigned int nr_process_chains;
@@ -1797,20 +1812,12 @@ static inline void inc_chains(void)
  */
 static int
 check_prev_add(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *prev,
-              struct held_lock *next, int distance, int *stack_saved)
+              struct held_lock *next, int distance, struct stack_trace *trace)
 {
        struct lock_list *entry;
        int ret;
        struct lock_list this;
        struct lock_list *uninitialized_var(target_entry);
-       /*
-        * Static variable, serialized by the graph_lock().
-        *
-        * We use this static variable to save the stack trace in case
-        * we call into this function multiple times due to encountering
-        * trylocks in the held lock stack.
-        */
-       static struct stack_trace trace;
 
        /*
         * Prove that the new <prev> -> <next> dependency would not
@@ -1858,11 +1865,7 @@ static inline void inc_chains(void)
                }
        }
 
-       if (!*stack_saved) {
-               if (!save_trace(&trace))
-                       return 0;
-               *stack_saved = 1;
-       }
+       trace->skip = 1; /* mark used */
 
        /*
         * Ok, all validations passed, add the new lock
@@ -1870,14 +1873,14 @@ static inline void inc_chains(void)
         */
        ret = add_lock_to_list(hlock_class(next),
                               &hlock_class(prev)->locks_after,
-                              next->acquire_ip, distance, &trace);
+                              next->acquire_ip, distance, trace);
 
        if (!ret)
                return 0;
 
        ret = add_lock_to_list(hlock_class(prev),
                               &hlock_class(next)->locks_before,
-                              next->acquire_ip, distance, &trace);
+                              next->acquire_ip, distance, trace);
        if (!ret)
                return 0;
 
@@ -1885,8 +1888,6 @@ static inline void inc_chains(void)
         * Debugging printouts:
         */
        if (verbose(hlock_class(prev)) || verbose(hlock_class(next))) {
-               /* We drop graph lock, so another thread can overwrite trace. */
-               *stack_saved = 0;
                graph_unlock();
                printk("\n new dependency: ");
                print_lock_name(hlock_class(prev));
@@ -1908,10 +1909,15 @@ static inline void inc_chains(void)
 static int
 check_prevs_add(struct task_struct *curr, struct held_lock *next)
 {
+       struct stack_trace trace = { .nr_entries = 0, .skip = 0, };
        int depth = curr->lockdep_depth;
-       int stack_saved = 0;
        struct held_lock *hlock;
 
+       if (!save_trace(&trace))
+               goto out_bug;
+
+       trace.skip = 0; /* abuse to mark usage */
+
        /*
         * Debugging checks.
         *
@@ -1936,7 +1942,7 @@ static inline void inc_chains(void)
                 */
                if (hlock->read != 2 && hlock->check) {
                        if (!check_prev_add(curr, hlock, next,
-                                               distance, &stack_saved))
+                                           distance, &trace))
                                return 0;
                        /*
                         * Stop after the first non-trylock entry,
@@ -1962,6 +1968,9 @@ static inline void inc_chains(void)
        }
        return 1;
 out_bug:
+       if (trace.nr_entries && !trace.skip)
+               return_trace(&trace);
+
        if (!debug_locks_off_graph_unlock())
                return 0;
 

Reply via email to