From patchwork Wed Jun 7 13:00:55 2017 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Brian Foster X-Patchwork-Id: 9771497 Return-Path: Received: from mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (pdx-wl-mail.web.codeaurora.org [172.30.200.125]) by pdx-korg-patchwork.web.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48A7060350 for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 13:00:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CEE726E39 for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 13:00:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix, from userid 486) id 3E5CE284CF; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 13:00:59 +0000 (UTC) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on pdx-wl-mail.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 required=2.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95C0A26E39 for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 13:00:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751444AbdFGNA5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jun 2017 09:00:57 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:54690 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751203AbdFGNA5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jun 2017 09:00:57 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C4097DC8F4 for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 13:00:56 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com C4097DC8F4 Authentication-Results: ext-mx09.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx09.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=bfoster@redhat.com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com C4097DC8F4 Received: from bfoster.bfoster (dhcp-41-20.bos.redhat.com [10.18.41.20]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5DD917A90 for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 13:00:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bfoster.bfoster (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 943B7123457; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 09:00:55 -0400 (EDT) From: Brian Foster To: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH v2] xfs: fix spurious spin_is_locked() assert failures on non-smp kernels Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2017 09:00:55 -0400 Message-Id: <1496840455-65279-1-git-send-email-bfoster@redhat.com> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.13 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.38]); Wed, 07 Jun 2017 13:00:56 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP The 0-day kernel test robot reports assertion failures on !CONFIG_SMP kernels due to failed spin_is_locked() checks. As it turns out, spin_is_locked() is hardcoded to return zero on !CONFIG_SMP kernels and so this function cannot be relied on to verify spinlock state in this configuration. To avoid this problem, replace the associated asserts with lockdep variants that do the right thing regardless of kernel configuration. Drop the one assert that checks for an unlocked lock as there is no suitable lockdep variant for that case. This moves the spinlock checks from XFS debug code to lockdep, but generally provides the same level of protection. Reported-by: kbuild test robot Signed-off-by: Brian Foster Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig Reviewed-by: Darrick J. Wong --- Here's another version that uses lockdep calls as suggested by Christoph. Brian v2: - Use lockdep asserts instead of config check. - Drop !spin_is_locked() assert from inode initialization. v1: http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-xfs/msg07463.html fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c | 2 +- fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c | 5 ++--- 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c index 07b77b7..16d6a57 100644 --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c @@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ static inline void __xfs_buf_ioacct_dec( struct xfs_buf *bp) { - ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&bp->b_lock)); + lockdep_assert_held(&bp->b_lock); if (bp->b_state & XFS_BSTATE_IN_FLIGHT) { bp->b_state &= ~XFS_BSTATE_IN_FLIGHT; diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c index f61c84f8..990210f 100644 --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c @@ -66,7 +66,6 @@ xfs_inode_alloc( XFS_STATS_INC(mp, vn_active); ASSERT(atomic_read(&ip->i_pincount) == 0); - ASSERT(!spin_is_locked(&ip->i_flags_lock)); ASSERT(!xfs_isiflocked(ip)); ASSERT(ip->i_ino == 0); @@ -190,7 +189,7 @@ xfs_perag_set_reclaim_tag( { struct xfs_mount *mp = pag->pag_mount; - ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&pag->pag_ici_lock)); + lockdep_assert_held(&pag->pag_ici_lock); if (pag->pag_ici_reclaimable++) return; @@ -212,7 +211,7 @@ xfs_perag_clear_reclaim_tag( { struct xfs_mount *mp = pag->pag_mount; - ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&pag->pag_ici_lock)); + lockdep_assert_held(&pag->pag_ici_lock); if (--pag->pag_ici_reclaimable) return;