lockdep: Extend __bfs() to work with multiple types of dependencies
Now we have four types of dependencies in the dependency graph, and not all the pathes carry real dependencies (the dependencies that may cause a deadlock), for example: Given lock A and B, if we have: CPU1 CPU2 ============= ============== write_lock(A); read_lock(B); read_lock(B); write_lock(A); (assuming read_lock(B) is a recursive reader) then we have dependencies A -(ER)-> B, and B -(SN)-> A, and a dependency path A -(ER)-> B -(SN)-> A. In lockdep w/o recursive locks, a dependency path from A to A means a deadlock. However, the above case is obviously not a deadlock, because no one holds B exclusively, therefore no one waits for the other to release B, so who get A first in CPU1 and CPU2 will run non-blockingly. As a result, dependency path A -(ER)-> B -(SN)-> A is not a real/strong dependency that could cause a deadlock. From the observation above, we know that for a dependency path to be real/strong, no two adjacent dependencies can be as -(*R)-> -(S*)->. Now our mission is to make __bfs() traverse only the strong dependency paths, which is simple: we record whether we only have -(*R)-> for the previous lock_list of the path in lock_list::only_xr, and when we pick a dependency in the traverse, we 1) filter out -(S*)-> dependency if the previous lock_list only has -(*R)-> dependency (i.e. ->only_xr is true) and 2) set the next lock_list::only_xr to true if we only have -(*R)-> left after we filter out dependencies based on 1), otherwise, set it to false. With this extension for __bfs(), we now need to initialize the root of __bfs() properly (with a correct ->only_xr), to do so, we introduce some helper functions, which also cleans up a little bit for the __bfs() root initialization code. Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200807074238.1632519-8-boqun.feng@gmail.com
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment