| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
Remove __assume_ctx_lock() from lock initializers.
Implicitly asserting an active context during initialization caused
false-positive double-lock errors when acquiring a lock immediately after its
initialization. Moving forward, guarded member initialization must either:
1. Use guard(type_init)(&lock) or scoped_guard(type_init, ...).
2. Use context_unsafe() for simple initialization.
Reported-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Signed-off-by: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/57062131-e79e-42c2-aa0b-8f931cb8cac2@acm.org/
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260119094029.1344361-7-elver@google.com
|
|
As discussed in [1], removing __cond_lock() will improve the readability
of trylock code. Now that Sparse context tracking support has been
removed, we can also remove __cond_lock().
Change existing APIs to either drop __cond_lock() completely, or make
use of the __cond_acquires() function attribute instead.
In particular, spinlock and rwlock implementations required switching
over to inline helpers rather than statement-expressions for their
trylock_* variants.
Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250207082832.GU7145@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net/ [1]
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20251219154418.3592607-25-elver@google.com
|
|
Add support for Clang's context analysis for raw_spinlock_t,
spinlock_t, and rwlock. This wholesale conversion is required because
all three of them are interdependent.
To avoid warnings in constructors, the initialization functions mark a
lock as acquired when initialized before guarded variables.
The test verifies that common patterns do not generate false positives.
Signed-off-by: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20251219154418.3592607-9-elver@google.com
|
|
When PREEMPT_RT=y, spin locks are mapped to rt_mutex types, so using
spinlock_check() + __raw_spin_lock_init() to initialize spin locks is
incorrect, and would cause build errors.
Introduce __spin_lock_init() to initialize a spin lock with lockdep
rquired information for PREEMPT_RT builds, and use it in the Rust
helper.
Fixes: d2d6422f8bd1 ("x86: Allow to enable PREEMPT_RT.")
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202409251238.vetlgXE9-lkp@intel.com/
Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Eder Zulian <ezulian@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Tested-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241107163223.2092690-2-ezulian@redhat.com
|
|
spin_trylock_irqsave() has a __cond_lock() wrapper which points to
__spin_trylock_irqsave(). The function then invokes spin_trylock() which
has another __cond_lock() finally pointing to rt_spin_trylock().
The compiler has no problem to parse this but sparse does not recognise
that users of spin_trylock_irqsave() acquire a conditional lock and
complains.
Remove one layer of __cond_lock() so that sparse recognises conditional
locking.
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240812104200.2239232-3-bigeasy@linutronix.de
|
|
The sleeping locks on PREEMPT_RT (rt_spin_lock() and friends) lack
sparse annotation. Therefore a missing spin_unlock() won't be spotted by
sparse in a PREEMPT_RT build while it is noticed on a !PREEMPT_RT build.
Add the __acquires/__releases macros to the lock/ unlock functions. The
trylock functions already use the __cond_lock() wrapper.
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240812104200.2239232-2-bigeasy@linutronix.de
|
|
From: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
The check for __LINUX_SPINLOCK_H within rwlock.h (and other files)
detects the direct include of the header file if it is at the very
beginning of the include section.
If it is listed later then chances are high that spinlock.h was already
included (including rwlock.h) and the additional listing of rwlock.h
will not cause any failure.
On PREEMPT_RT this additional rwlock.h will lead to compile failures
since it uses a different rwlock implementation.
Add __LINUX_INSIDE_SPINLOCK_H to spinlock.h and check for this instead
of __LINUX_SPINLOCK_H to detect wrong includes. This will help detect
direct includes of rwlock.h with without PREEMPT_RT enabled.
[ bigeasy: add remaining __LINUX_SPINLOCK_H user and rewrite
commit description. ]
Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/YweemHxJx7O8rjBx@linutronix.de
|
|
Add the static and runtime initializer mechanics to support the RT variant
of local_lock, which requires the lock type in the lockdep map to be set
to LD_LOCK_PERCPU.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211305.967526724@linutronix.de
|
|
Similar to rw_semaphores, on RT the rwlock substitution is not writer fair,
because it's not feasible to have a writer inherit its priority to
multiple readers. Readers blocked on a writer follow the normal rules of
priority inheritance. Like RT spinlocks, RT rwlocks are state preserving
across the slow lock operations (contended case).
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211303.882793524@linutronix.de
|
|
Provide the necessary wrappers around the actual rtmutex based spinlock
implementation.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211303.712897671@linutronix.de
|
