On 3/21/21 2:49 AM, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
Since this message is printed when dynamically allocated spinlocks (e.g. kzalloc()) are used without initialization (e.g. spin_lock_init()), suggest developers to check whether initialization functions for objects are called, before making developers wonder what annotation is missing.Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-ker...@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> --- kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c index c6d0c1dc6253..44c549f5c061 100644 --- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c +++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c @@ -931,6 +931,7 @@ static bool assign_lock_key(struct lockdep_map *lock) debug_locks_off(); pr_err("INFO: trying to register non-static key.\n"); pr_err("the code is fine but needs lockdep annotation.\n"); + pr_err("maybe you didn't initialize this object before you use?\n"); pr_err("turning off the locking correctness validator.\n"); dump_stack(); return false;
The only way this message is written is when the appropriate lock init function isn't called for locks in dynamically allocated objects. I think you can just say so without the word "maybe". Like "the code is fine but needs lockdep annotation by calling appropriate lock initialization function.".
Cheers, Longman
