Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Thu, 14 Mar 2013 03:09:00 +0000 | From | Eric Wong <> | Subject | [PATCH mm] epoll: lock ep->mtx in ep_free to silence lockdep |
| |
Technically we do not need to hold ep->mtx during ep_free since we are certain there are no other users of ep at that point. However, lockdep complains with a "suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage!" message; so lock the mutex before ep_remove to silence the warning.
Signed-off-by: Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net> Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@android.com> Cc: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org> Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> Cc: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>, Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> --- I considered using lockdep_off()/lockdep_on(), but I figure that may hide other bugs...
fs/eventpoll.c | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs/eventpoll.c b/fs/eventpoll.c index 633e69f..d71b754 100644 --- a/fs/eventpoll.c +++ b/fs/eventpoll.c @@ -745,11 +745,15 @@ static void ep_free(struct eventpoll *ep) * point we are sure no poll callbacks will be lingering around, and also by * holding "epmutex" we can be sure that no file cleanup code will hit * us during this operation. So we can avoid the lock on "ep->lock". + * We do not need to lock ep->mtx, either, we only do it to prevent + * a lockdep warning. */ + mutex_lock(&ep->mtx); while ((rbp = rb_first(&ep->rbr)) != NULL) { epi = rb_entry(rbp, struct epitem, rbn); ep_remove(ep, epi); } + mutex_unlock(&ep->mtx); mutex_unlock(&epmutex); mutex_destroy(&ep->mtx); -- Eric Wong -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |