Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | From | paulmck@kernel ... | Subject | [PATCH tip/core/rcu 4/6] rcu: Add lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled() to raw_spin_unlock_rcu_node() macros | Date | Tue, 5 Jan 2021 16:57:34 -0800 |
| |
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
This commit adds a lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled() call to the helper macros that release the rcu_node structure's ->lock, namely to raw_spin_unlock_rcu_node(), raw_spin_unlock_irq_rcu_node() and raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore_rcu_node(). The point of this is to help track down a situation where lockdep appears to be insisting that interrupts are enabled while holding an rcu_node structure's ->lock.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20201111133813.GA81547@elver.google.com/ Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org> --- kernel/rcu/rcu.h | 16 +++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/rcu.h b/kernel/rcu/rcu.h index e01cba5..839f5be 100644 --- a/kernel/rcu/rcu.h +++ b/kernel/rcu/rcu.h @@ -378,7 +378,11 @@ do { \ smp_mb__after_unlock_lock(); \ } while (0) -#define raw_spin_unlock_rcu_node(p) raw_spin_unlock(&ACCESS_PRIVATE(p, lock)) +#define raw_spin_unlock_rcu_node(p) \ +do { \ + lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled(); \ + raw_spin_unlock(&ACCESS_PRIVATE(p, lock)); \ +} while (0) #define raw_spin_lock_irq_rcu_node(p) \ do { \ @@ -387,7 +391,10 @@ do { \ } while (0) #define raw_spin_unlock_irq_rcu_node(p) \ - raw_spin_unlock_irq(&ACCESS_PRIVATE(p, lock)) +do { \ + lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled(); \ + raw_spin_unlock_irq(&ACCESS_PRIVATE(p, lock)); \ +} while (0) #define raw_spin_lock_irqsave_rcu_node(p, flags) \ do { \ @@ -396,7 +403,10 @@ do { \ } while (0) #define raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore_rcu_node(p, flags) \ - raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ACCESS_PRIVATE(p, lock), flags) +do { \ + lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled(); \ + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ACCESS_PRIVATE(p, lock), flags); \ +} while (0) #define raw_spin_trylock_rcu_node(p) \ ({ \ -- 2.9.5
| |