lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Nov]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2] kmemleak: Turn kmemleak_lock to raw spinlock on RT
On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 12:06:11PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2018-11-23 12:02:55 [+0100], Andrea Parri wrote:
> > > is this an RT-only problem? Because mainline should not allow read->read
> > > locking or read->write locking for reader-writer locks. If this only
> > > happens on v4.18 and not on v4.19 then something must have fixed it.
> >
> > Probably misunderstanding, but I'd say that read->read locking is "the
> > norm"...?
> >
> > If you don't use qrwlock, readers are also "recursive", in part.,
> >
> > P0 P1
> > read_lock(l)
> > write_lock(l)
> > read_lock(l)
> >
> > won't block P0 on the second read_lock(). (qrwlock somehow complicate
> > the analysis; IIUC, they are recursive if and only if in_interrupt().).
>
> ehm, peterz, is that true? My memory on that is that all readers will
> block if there is a writer pending.

With qwrlocks, the readers will normally block if there is a pending
writer (to avoid starving the writer), unless in_interrupt() when the
readers are allowed to starve a pending writer.

TLA+/PlusCal model here: ;)

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/cmarinas/kernel-tla.git/tree/qrwlock.tla

--
Catalin

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-11-23 12:32    [W:2.189 / U:0.404 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site