Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 18 Sep 2022 11:31:46 -0700 | From | Boqun Feng <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] lockdep: report name and key when look_up_lock_class() got confused |
| |
On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 12:01:30AM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > Printing this information will be helpful. > > ------------[ cut here ]------------ > class->name=slock-AF_INET6 lock->name=l2tp_sock lock->key=l2tp_socket_class > WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 9237 at kernel/locking/lockdep.c:940 look_up_lock_class+0xcc/0x140 > Modules linked in: > CPU: 2 PID: 9237 Comm: a.out Not tainted 6.0.0-rc5-00094-ga335366bad13-dirty #860 > Hardware name: innotek GmbH VirtualBox/VirtualBox, BIOS VirtualBox 12/01/2006 > RIP: 0010:look_up_lock_class+0xcc/0x140 > > Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> > --- > kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 6 ++++-- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c > index 64a13eb56078..a22469dbeeee 100644 > --- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c > +++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c > @@ -934,8 +934,10 @@ look_up_lock_class(const struct lockdep_map *lock, unsigned int subclass) > * Huh! same key, different name? Did someone trample > * on some memory? We're most confused. > */ > - WARN_ON_ONCE(class->name != lock->name && > - lock->key != &__lockdep_no_validate__); > + WARN_ONCE(class->name != lock->name && > + lock->key != &__lockdep_no_validate__, > + "class->name=%s lock->name=%s lock->key=%ps\n", > + class->name, lock->name, lock->key);
Maybe more human readable information like:
"Looking for class \"%s\" with key %ps, but found a different class \"%s\" with the same key\n" lock->name, lock->key, class->name);
?
Regards, Boqun
> return class; > } > } > -- > 2.34.1 >
| |