[3/7] dax: Add missing annotation for wait_entry_unlocked()
diff mbox series

Message ID 20200331204643.11262-4-jbi.octave@gmail.com
State New
Headers show
Series
  • Untitled series #264541
Related show

Commit Message

Jules Irenge March 31, 2020, 8:46 p.m. UTC
Sparse reports a warning at wait_entry_unlocked()

warning: context imbalance in wait_entry_unlocked()
	- unexpected unlock

The root cause is the missing annotation at wait_entry_unlocked()
Add the missing __releases(xa) annotation.

Signed-off-by: Jules Irenge <jbi.octave@gmail.com>
---
 fs/dax.c | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

Comments

Jan Kara April 1, 2020, 10:01 a.m. UTC | #1
On Tue 31-03-20 21:46:39, Jules Irenge wrote:
> Sparse reports a warning at wait_entry_unlocked()
> 
> warning: context imbalance in wait_entry_unlocked()
> 	- unexpected unlock
> 
> The root cause is the missing annotation at wait_entry_unlocked()
> Add the missing __releases(xa) annotation.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jules Irenge <jbi.octave@gmail.com>
> ---
>  fs/dax.c | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/dax.c b/fs/dax.c
> index 1f1f0201cad1..adcd2a57fbad 100644
> --- a/fs/dax.c
> +++ b/fs/dax.c
> @@ -244,6 +244,7 @@ static void *get_unlocked_entry(struct xa_state *xas, unsigned int order)
>   * After we call xas_unlock_irq(), we cannot touch xas->xa.
>   */
>  static void wait_entry_unlocked(struct xa_state *xas, void *entry)
> +	__releases(xa)

Thanks for the patch but is this a proper sparse annotation? I'd rather
expect something like __releases(xas->xa->xa_lock) here...

								Honza

>  {
>  	struct wait_exceptional_entry_queue ewait;
>  	wait_queue_head_t *wq;
> -- 
> 2.24.1
>
Jules Irenge April 1, 2020, 4:04 p.m. UTC | #2
On Wed, 1 Apr 2020, Jan Kara wrote:

> On Tue 31-03-20 21:46:39, Jules Irenge wrote:
>> Sparse reports a warning at wait_entry_unlocked()
>>
>> warning: context imbalance in wait_entry_unlocked()
>> 	- unexpected unlock
>>
>> The root cause is the missing annotation at wait_entry_unlocked()
>> Add the missing __releases(xa) annotation.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jules Irenge <jbi.octave@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>  fs/dax.c | 1 +
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/dax.c b/fs/dax.c
>> index 1f1f0201cad1..adcd2a57fbad 100644
>> --- a/fs/dax.c
>> +++ b/fs/dax.c
>> @@ -244,6 +244,7 @@ static void *get_unlocked_entry(struct xa_state *xas, unsigned int order)
>>   * After we call xas_unlock_irq(), we cannot touch xas->xa.
>>   */
>>  static void wait_entry_unlocked(struct xa_state *xas, void *entry)
>> +	__releases(xa)
>
> Thanks for the patch but is this a proper sparse annotation? I'd rather
> expect something like __releases(xas->xa->xa_lock) here...
>
> 								Honza
>
>>  {
>>  	struct wait_exceptional_entry_queue ewait;
>>  	wait_queue_head_t *wq;
>> --
>> 2.24.1
>>
> -- 
> Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
> SUSE Labs, CR
>
Thanks for the kind reply. I learned and changed. If there is a further 
issue, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Thanks,
Jules

Patch
diff mbox series

diff --git a/fs/dax.c b/fs/dax.c
index 1f1f0201cad1..adcd2a57fbad 100644
--- a/fs/dax.c
+++ b/fs/dax.c
@@ -244,6 +244,7 @@  static void *get_unlocked_entry(struct xa_state *xas, unsigned int order)
  * After we call xas_unlock_irq(), we cannot touch xas->xa.
  */
 static void wait_entry_unlocked(struct xa_state *xas, void *entry)
+	__releases(xa)
 {
 	struct wait_exceptional_entry_queue ewait;
 	wait_queue_head_t *wq;